Cap-and-Trade Letter Stating Concerns Sent to Governor Brown
SACRAMENTO, CA — After a whirlwind of discussions thanks to Gov. Brown’s legislative cram down, the Senate Republican Caucus delivered him a letter voicing concerns about the detrimental effects of his proposed cap-and-trade policy.
Below are excerpts: Continue reading
By: Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, CA
U.S. Representative Darrell Issa — my Congressman — wants to screw the American public by forcing them (us) to take all the nuclear waste the nuclear industry has ever produced — with no safe place to put it.
Meanwhile, local residents of the closed San Onofre Nuclear (Waste) Generating Station have renamed the spent fuel there as the “Darrell Issa Nuclear Waste Dump” because of his support for the plant while it was open, and his (failed) attempts to have it reopen after the plant was shut down permanently on January 31, 2012 due to faulty steam generators. And there the waste sits in enormous, thin-walled, so-called “stainless” steel casks. Now, Darrell Issa is playing on the fears of local residents who want the waste moved away from the coast in order to push his proposal. Continue reading
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 17, 2015
CONTACT: Jacqui Nguyen @ (916) 651-4029
Senate Republican Leader Calls for Oversight Hearing to Investigate Prop. 39
SACRAMENTO – In response to an investigative piece by the Associated Press that showed a three-year-old ballot measure that promised to create more than 33,000 green jobs, yet delivered only 1,700 jobs, Senate Republican Leader Bob Huff (R-San Dimas) is calling on the Legislature to convene an oversight hearing to investigate the effectiveness of Proposition 39 – the so-called “Clean Energy Jobs Act”- and where the tax dollars have been spent. Continue reading
My discussion with Issa about San Onofre
Tonight I was called (by a computer) to participate in a Darrell Issa electronic Town Hall meeting. The way it works is that he talks constantly at length and you can call in a question, first screened by a staff member. I was put in a line for about 30 min listening to questions and his answers, mostly softball questions from his conservative base. On one question about the Middle East, he said that we don’t know if Israel has any nuclear weapons (it has been known for decades that they have at least 500).
I finally got recognized and told him that the number one issue in his district was San Onofre becoming a nuclear waste dump indefinitely, a huge public danger with 2000 tons of waste in a tsunami quake zone. I further said that Yucca was rejected by the DOE as not having enough room and by scientists because of deep water penetration, and he has done nothing to help get this waste moved. Then he cut me off and went on and on but I could not interject or answer or debate. All one sided. Continue reading
Nuclear Waste: Here or Elsewhere?
Nuclear Experts Meet to Discuss Dilemma of Storing Radioactive Waste
By: Roger Johnson
When the San Onofre nuclear power plant was built, everyone was told that there was a plan to remove the radioactive waste it produced. Now it is closed, but the new plan is to leave it here indefinitely. This is an alarming turn of events for everyone who lives within 50 miles of San Onofre. The inability of government and the nuclear industry to figure out a solution has led to a lot of talk but very little action. Locally, about 2,000 tons of highly radioactive uranium and plutonium rest above ground a few hundred feet from the ocean on one side and I-5 on the other. Since there is no plan to dispose of it, this highly toxic waste will remain in our backyard for many decades (or centuries) to come.
To address this threat, a large crowd filled the San Juan Capistrano Community Center on Jan. 27 to hear a 3 hour panel discussion called “America’s Nuclear Future: Taking Action to Address Nuclear Waste.” This was a joint meeting of Edison’s Community Engagement Panel and the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington D.C. think tank. The panel focused on what local, state, and regional stakeholders can do stimulate progress on this issue which has plagued the nation for half a century. Addressing the audience were 21 panelists ranging from nuclear experts to concerned citizens. Continue reading
Why we went to Federal Court over San Onofre
By: Joe Holtzman
What We Know
The four new steam generators cost $138,000,000.1 (Demand for Arbitration p. 49) Their tube wear was caused by (i) insufficient in-plane tube support and (ii) high localized thermal-hydraulic conditions. 2 All four steam generators were permanently removed from service after less than two years of operation. (Demand for Arbitration p. 49)
The San Onofre nuclear power station consists of two “Units” – Unit 2 and Unit 3 – each of which is powered by a Pressurized Water Reactor (“PWR”). In a PWR, two main fluid systems work together to produce electric power: (1) the Reactor Coolant, or “primary,” system and (2) the Main Steam, or “secondary,” system. The primary system in each Unit contains a nuclear reactor that heats water to about 600 degrees Fahrenheit. The heated, radioactive water is circulated under pressure through thousands of metal alloy tubes inside two steam generators per Unit. The hot water heats the tubes, and the tubes transfer heat to non-radioactive water surrounding the tubes in the secondary system. That water, in turn, becomes high-pressure steam that flows up and through the tube bundle and then is piped into a steam-driven turbine-generator, where electricity is generated. Figure 1 on the following page generally illustrates the relationship between the two systems” 3 Continue reading