Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Power Technology

Decommissioning San Onofre Nuclear Plant May Take Decades 266

Posted by samzenpus
from the long-game dept.
gkndivebum writes "Southern California Edison has elected to decommission the San Onofre nuclear plant after a failed effort to upgrade the steam generation system. 'Nuclear economics' is the reason stated for the proposed decommissioning. Other utilities operating nuclear power plants in the US likely face similar decisions when it comes to weighing the costs of upgrading older facilities. Allowing the reactors to remain in 'safe storage' for a period of up to 60 years will allow for radioactive decay and lower radiation exposure for the workers performing the demolition."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Decommissioning San Onofre Nuclear Plant May Take Decades

Comments Filter:
  • by girlintraining (1395911) on Sunday June 09, 2013 @07:58PM (#43956445)

    I have knowledge of this matter and I know it's crap. This is about negotiating with a supplier and throwing a tantrum. They have decided to cut off their nose to spite their face.

    We invented this technology and now, due to anti-nuclear regulations, we no longer have the people, resources, factories, or technical capability, to create nuclear pressure vessels or many of the components needed to build a reactor. Unless of course it's for the military. A single supplier, in another country, can "throw a tantrum" as you say, and deprive one of our major metropolitan areas with electricity.

    And yet it's the fault of the electric company in your view, and the supplier in another's view. Well, bluntly stated -- where the fuck is my own government on this? Where's our own industry? Why can't we build our own damn nuclear reactors? Oh... right... anti-nuclear idiocy and impossibly high standards along with a morass of NIMBY government, red tape, etc. No... sorry, they didn't cut their nose off in spite of their face: Our government did.

  • by girlintraining (1395911) on Sunday June 09, 2013 @09:17PM (#43957005)

    The supplier is not throwing the tantrum. Take my word on that for now.

    I didn't say you were saying that. I said other people were saying that. I did not say that myself.

    But I do know there are forces opposed to the NRC... to its very existence.

    Yes. They're called capitalists, and left to their own devices, we'd all be swimming in our own sewage and slaves to mega corporations in some dystopic alternate reality. It's okay, you can call them out on it, I won't say anything.

    For the moment, please understand that you don't understand quite what's going on over there.

    I don't think it's really necessary for me to have intimate knowledge of the situation. Party A is pointing the finger at Party B. Party B is pointing the finger at Party A. And all the people living in the area, who need clean, cheap, reliable energy are getting... is the finger. I'm not really in much of a mood for caring much about details on it... Someone fucked up. And in cases of fuckups in this country, profit-oriented thinking is almost invariably the source of it. So... whoever thinks they're most entitled to profit is the at-fault party. I know, it's overly simplistic, it ignores all the details, but... it's surprisingly accurate. Unfortunately.

    But this thing about shutting down two plants which are otherwise capable of being repaired and restored to a good, safe and reliable operation? Based on everything I know, it's not merely "nuclear economics." There's a lot more.

    Well, I'm not in the position you are, so maybe, with specific information, I can be convinced otherwise, but "nuclear economics" is just a fancy way of saying someone who felt they should be making money on this isn't making as much as they feel entitled to. Now, as to who that is, or what complex bureaucratic clusterfuck surrounds that person so as to obscure their identity so we can grab our pitchforks and tar and feather the asshole... meh!

    I have no problems with the NRC. I have no problems with the people in (what's left) of our nuclear industry. I have a problem with a government listening to morons, politicians, and businessmen, and ignoring the needs of its people. And those people, in that area, need electricity. They deserve electricity. There isn't a good reason why the largest economic power on the planet can't deliver turn of the last century amenities at an affordable, safe, and reliable way.

    There are plenty of bad ones however. I suspect the bad one you're sore about in particular is the profiteering asshats who own the plant. I'm strongly inclined to agree with you, if that's your position, simply because past experience has shown me that in this country, the Almighty Dollar is the cause of almost every train wreck that makes the news and there's no evidence this one's any different.

  • by Seth (2925311) on Sunday June 09, 2013 @10:49PM (#43957569)
    I believe in making the world safe for our children, but not our children's children, because I don't think children should be having sex. -Jack Handey

If God is perfect, why did He create discontinuous functions?

Working...