ROBERT SCHMAD
CONTRIBUTOR
The Democratic-controlled California Senate and Assembly opposed a loan that would extend the lifespan of the state’s last remaining nuclear power plant, Newsweek reported Friday.
Democrats in the California state legislature voted Thursday to cancel a $400 million loan proposed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom that would help keep the state’s Diablo Canyon nuclear facility open until 2030, five years longer than its current expiry date, according to Newsweek. Nuclear energy produces zero carbon emissions and the Diablo Canyon plant in particular produces 9% of the energy used by California’s nearly 40 million inhabitants, according to the Department of Energy (DOE).
California lawmakers cited estimates claiming that keeping the plant open past its current 2025 closing date could cost nearly $12 billion as their reasoning for opposing the loan, the Associated Press reported. Pacific Gas & Electric, the company operating the plant, pushed back on these estimates, saying the extension will cost $8.3 billion and argued that “the financial benefits exceed the costs.” (RELATED: Org That Wants To Cut Carbon Emissions Sues To Close Zero-Emission Nuclear Power Plant)
“The budget process for the state is ongoing, so it would be premature for us to comment,” Pacific Gas & Electric told the Daily Caller News Foundation when asked about the legislature’s vote.
The legislature’s move against the loan brushes up against one of Newsom’s top priorities, aggressively increasing the proportion of California’s energy that comes from renewable sources. Newsom and the legislature established goals in 2022 for the state to reach 90% renewable electricity by 2035, 95% by 2040 and 100% by 2045.
Newsom previously opposed extending the lifespan of the plant, though changed his position, reportedly because he wanted to avoid widespread blackouts like the ones that hit California in August 2020, according to the AP.
The DOE in April approved a $1.1 billion credit payment to keep the Diablo Canyon Power Plant open past 2025 after conducting an environmental assessment and concluding that the plant “complies with Federal, state, and local environmental regulations, requirements, and agreements and operates using best management practices.”
Nuclear power plants do not directly produce carbon emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Additionally, the volume of nuclear waste produced by American nuclear plants in a given year would fill less than half the volume of an Olympic-sized swimming pool, according to the DOE.
Despite the risk assessment and the lack of carbon emissions, environmentalist groups like the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility joined California Democrats in opposing the loan to extend the nuclear plant’s lifespan, according to Newsweek.
Newsom is pursuing ways to reduce emissions in California beyond saving the Diablo Canyon plant, including by pushing for a ban on the sale of gas-powered passenger vehicles by 2035. The infrastructure required to support the transition to electric vehicles could cost anywhere between $6 billion and $20 billion, according to a study published in the scientific journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
California under Newsom has also made large investments into solar and wind energy. Many of the solar companies the state fed funds to, however, now face bankruptcy.
The California governor’s office did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Quite expensive for cheap nuclear. As is to be expected.
It provides reliable and dispatchable power.
Something California desperately needs.
““the financial benefits exceed the costs.””
That is what a LOAN means
Something that will never happen with wind and solar, which require subsidy and mandates to even exist, and can never supply at grid level requirements.
Those wind and solar subsidies will never be paid back.
And, wind and solar installations don’t last long. A solar “farm” built next to my ‘hood, in less than 10 years, needed many of the panels to be replaced after a lightning storm damaged much of it. At least that was the excuse I heard from a guy working on the fix.
HAVE you looked at the entrie ‘economics’ for so-called renewables? Harvesting the intermittent wind and soaking-up solar radiation as the ‘main diet’ to provide a state with electric power 24/7 is the COSTLY route … and now the ‘tech’ industry wants to turn to power-hungry AI-data centers, WHERE is a steady, reliable, and reasonably economical source of electric energy to be had?
But, but, but … did you know that in any given year there are 999 millionbillmegatetra-ions (Biden speak) Joules of available wind energy flying, unharnessed across the face of our planet!? Enough wind energy to provide ALL our energy need 5000x over!?
Let’s all get to work covering land and sea with wind factories! Yeay
Now I get the ‘Contrarian’ label.
That’s a pretty low bar you have there.
Even a worm couldn’t get under the reality bar Luser sets. !
A cockroach always manages though.
The cost would be a fraction of just solar subsidies alone, and solar does not provide dispatchable supply.
Not surprising from MUN. If you are antinuclear you are pro-blackout. The question is how many homes and business does MUN want to have robbed during the blackouts.
MUN will likely be the one robbing
If by robbing you mean he is employed in the “green” energy sector … well … yes, we CA ratepayers are being robbed blind by all the so-called “green” “renewable” intermittent energy
He believes he’s going to be on the receiving end of other people’s money.
It’s highly likely that he’s wrong again.
Those at the bottom of the human ladder, will just sink deeper into the sewer they are creating.
Well we’ll see how cheap the fickles are when it closes next year shall we although I suspect the Guv already knows the answer with his sudden enthusiasm for nukes.
Only 1/3 the cost of cheap renewables for the same kWH capacity over the 60 years lifespan of a Nuclear Generator
And doesn’t require Carbon Intensive MASSIVE Battery Back-up to supply power 98% of the time 24/7/365 providing Power when Power is Needed like Night time Peak (something Solar can’t do and something Wind can’t do 60% of the year)
Wind and Solar isn’t just Wind and Solar it’s either
Wind plus Battery
Solar plus Battery
Wind and Solar plus Battery
And those Batteries are expensive and prone to self immolation
As is to be expected
They are extending the life of an existing plant past the date it was scheduled to be retired.
This involves a lot of work that needs to be paid back in just 5 years.
Beyond that, it’s a loan you moron. The only cost to the state is the slight subsidy in interest rate.
Not expensive at all. The $8.3B or even the higher $12B are the operational costs. What about the product, the electricity? Some quick arithmetic (I know, MUN, math makes your brain hurt) shows that Diablo Canyon operating 6 more years divided by the operating cost yields electricity at 7.5 cents/kilowatt-hour. Even using the higher $12B operating cost, electricity is produced at under 12 cents/kw-hr. Average rates in CA are 31 cents/kw-hr and rising rapidly.
Diablo Canyon produces 11% of California’s electricity (CO2 emissions free, as if I fear CO2, which I don’t), so shutting it down will immediately cost ratepayers an extra 2 cents/kw-hr. Since the nuclear plant operates reliably with a 90% capacity factor, shutdown moves CA ever closer to rolling blackouts.
“As you sow, so shall you reap.”
– Bible
Diablo should just shut down now.. for “maintenance” purposes of course. 😉
Local states should also find “issues” that stop them delivering electricity to California.
See how California copes !
Yeah, show the world how expendable nuclear really is.
Yes, California IS expendable.
It has devolved into a place of zero moral worth.
Full of mindless idiots just like you.
Without nuclear and imports from neighbouring coal fired states…
… they have basically NOTHING on a windless night.
They deserve everything they get.
“neighbouring coal fired states“
A list and amount from each would be nice. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie
There is a lot of hydro and wind on those lines.
There are 2 that I am aware of.
The 1,900 MW Intermountain Power Plant in Utah which delivers power to the LA Dept of Water and Power
The 1,540 MW Four Corners Gen Sta in New Mexico is owned by and pushes power to So. Cal. Ed
Why all the downvotes for MU on this one? He’s right, shut down ALL nuclear, let’s ALL find out exactly “how expendable” it is.
It is the actions of the ecoloonies over the decades that have greatly added the cost of nuclear power, that is why many here despise you for your bullshit you produce.
I’m guessing that you believe electricity comes from the electricity fairy.
No … from the wall sockets
re: “Local states should also find “issues” that stop them delivering electricity to California.”
Can one state impose an ‘exit tax’ on energy flowing ‘out’ from one state (‘to’ another)?
A couple states are now considering ‘exit taxes’ on citizens leaving … why not energy?
https://www.sambrotman.com/blog/california-exit-tax
CA is not the only state which has tried that strategy to continue to reap the benefits after an entity has left the area. Rush Limbaugh reported that NY pursued him for years to collect taxes after he left the state. Its why he completely shut down his operations in NYC. Well, that and the better weather in FL. Mostly.
I remember Rush describing his experiences with the New York State Tax people. He didn’t have much good to say about them.
DA Alvin Bragg would probably indict Rush, if Rush were still alive.
Would love to hear his opinion again. There’s nobody like him.
if Rush were still alive.
Don’t give him ideas, I’m not sure that would stop him.
Jim
Hmmm…Taxing people for the state’s failures. We are increasing the capital gains tax in Canada for that same purpose.
Yes.
Trudeau (“budgets balance themselves”) never figured out that the best way to get to an Operating Surplus reasonably quickly is to –
REDUCE SPENDING.
“Can one state impose an ‘exit tax’ on energy flowing ‘out’ from one state (‘to’ another)?”.
My understanding is, generally, no. The Interstate Commerce Act is a constitutional argument that is often invoked up to the highest court and usually wins. Some states may try to wriggle round it, but its legal power is immense.
For the same reason, the SC should rule that any attempts to apply income taxes to people who no longer live in the state should also fail.
On the other hand, it’s highly likely that once the Dems finish stacking the SC, the court will suddenly find that there is no limit to the power that government has.
The real problem is that new nuclear facilities weren’t built to replace Diablo at end-of-life…plus allow for consumption increases for the next 60 years. Nobody ever thought lawfare would be prohibitive to the cost and schedule of nuclear facilities. Instead, it triples the cost and adds a decade to the construction time. Politicians fell for the windmill salesmen’s pitch, and it turns out the required batteries weren’t mentioned by those windmill salesmen….plus the batteries cost as much as a backup nuclear plant….oops…
Small scale modular reactors could easily be up and running at Diablo by 2034. All that is required is a 2025 government insured loan to build the assembly line factory cookie cutter identical NRC design approved modules (NuScale NYSE symbol SMR). I care, I live within a few miles of Diablo.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/29/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-steps-to-bolster-domestic-nuclear-industry-and-advance-americas-clean-energy-future/
May 29, 2024, beginning today the inevitable gradual transition into small scale modular became a reality. Welcome to the nuclear renaissance.
MAY 29, 2024
Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Steps to Bolster Domestic Nuclear Industry and advance America’s Clean Energy Future
lots of great wisdom there, even if the metaphysics is wrong
Hello darkness, my old friend
I’ve come to talk with you again
There’s a pulse in the new-born sun;
A beat in the heat of noon;
There’s a song as the day grows long,
And a tempo in the tides of the moon.
It’s all around us and it’s everywhere,
And it’s deeper than royal blue.
And it feels so real you can feel the feeling!
And that’s the majesty of rock!
The mystery of roll!
The darning of the sock,
The scoring of the goal!
The farmer takes a wife,
The barber takes a pole,
We’re in this together, and ever….
https://youtu.be/RsOxgwF9LlM?si=ICyrAoXxf7kYUq-t
I don’t get it. Why does the Cali government need to get involved? Can’t PG&E get a loan from a regular bank?
PG&E is a CPUC regulated Utility and must go through the Bureaucracy
Kalifornia uber alles
California imports 30% of its power needs now.
Diablo supplies 9% uninterruptable baseload power for California. But there’s more to it than that.
Helms Creek Stored Hydro power relies on Diablo power to pump water uphill with cheap electrical at night. It doesn’t pencil without it. The same is true of the Central Valley Water Project pumps at the base of the Tehachapi’s. They are the biggest single power user in the state and provide ALL of Southern California’s water from Northern California.
Uh-oh. Me thinks the Californicators are in deep do-do. The stupids are about to shut down the whole west coast of the state, if they get their way. What a shame.
The future for diesel generators is bright.
Ve are chust following what the Germans did. No nukes for you!
Can Helms Creek be powered by unreliables?
Helms Creek and the California Water project are examples of using tiered power pricing to overcome the ridiculous idea of pumping water uphill to generate power by releasing it downhill again. But because nuclear power at night is the cheapest power available, the design of both systems relied on that cost differential to remain viable. Reducing efficiency and raising costs by using unreliable power instead is a fools errand.
“Diablo Canyon plant in particular produces 9% of the energy used by California’s nearly 40 million inhabitants”
Wow, 3.6 M people served by one power plant- instead of many thousands of acres of land paved over with wind and solar “farms” + battery back up systems.
Wow, 3.6 M people served by one power plant
That’s a LOT more than will be served by the massive solar installation they’re ripping out thousands of “protected” Joshua Trees for.
Joseph, in the beginning it was believed that nuclear bombardment would eventually lead to swelling of metals inside the reactor, leading to cracks and failure. As time has progressed, the effects don’t seem to be as bad as expected and so the life has been extended. Take care.
Topaz Solar Farm covers 4700 acres and averages (averages mind you…some months produce half what other months do) enough daily generation to power 15,000 homes from 10am until 2pm when few are using electricity.
Topaz produced at most 136,000MW-h in any given month and as little as 51,000MW-h while averaging 100,000+ MW-h in the summer months
Waste of space
Waste of money
Waste of time
Just another subsidy mine to line the pockets of Big Green
It would take more than 240 Topaz Solar Farms covering over a 960,000 acres to replace the generation supplied by Diablo Canyon and supply those same 3.6M customers
Oh, but it’s so pretty. Truly enhances the landscape. /s
Why does it cost so much to keep it going? Shouldn’t some of that $$$ been put aside during its many decades? If a reactor is well maintained, is there any reason it should have a limited life span? Will it need to be shut down with a major overhaul? I know zero about the subject- just asking.
We’re missing a lot of information here. The article starts with the denial of a $400M loan but then mentions additional ‘costs’ of $12/8.3B required to ‘operate’ the plant. Since the plant provides base load electricity, I’m wondering if the latter represent curtailment payments to renewables, but like you, I don’t know.
“… because California’s energy regulations give renewables priority over nuclear, the plant would likely only run half-time, making it uneconomical.” part of a quote from several years back; likely still true. {found at Wikipedia}
Here is data from the CAISO website. No evidence that nuclear is cutback to give priority to wind power. In fact, nuclear is the only traditional thermal source that can compete with wind power head to head, since nuclear power fuel is based on the principle of ‘use it or lose it.’ Wikipedia is not realiable in many areas.
When the rods are pushed in, in a nuclear reactor, the rate of fission in the fuel rods drops. So the idea that nuclear fuel is use it or lose it is not completely true.
Not quite that simple, due to 135Xe, nuclear generating station runs best at constant power. As for economics, the fixed capital costs far outweigh the incremental fuel costs.
Do note the French throttle their units; at one point, they had so many in service that was their only realistic choice. Don’t know if that is case today, although their original units are/were capable of this style of operation.
Presumably the reason why it is approaching end of life is because there is equipment in the plant that is approaching it’s end of life. In order to increase the plants end of life, all of this equipment will have to be replaced and or refurbished. Also, presumably, since the plant had been approaching end of life, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that there was a lot of maintenance that has been cancelled over the last few years.
Look at it this way, if the plant is scheduled to be shut down in 5 years, and a particular piece of equipment has a life expectancy of 10 years, why spend money making sure that the piece of equipment would be able to last all 10 of those years?
It is its own punishment.
California Democrats are unbelievably radical. Their craziness knows no bounds.
Besides shutting down perfently good nuclear power plants, they passed a law a few weeks ago requiring that illegal aliens be hired for State jobs!
I feel for the people of California who don’t agree with the radical Democrat agenda, but it looks like California is going to be one of the first crash-test dummies for the energy sector “because climate change”. California’s radical Democrats are going to show us how to wreck a State economy because of their unwarranted fears over the benign gas, CO2.
Who cares about California? Its deterioration into something similar to Venezuela will continue as everyone who can afford to flee the state continue to leave. Californians made these choices; they can live or perish from the consequences.
re: “Who cares about California?”
Who cares? The democrats in office at the national level; CA’s problems will become the USA’s/the country’s problems in short order. Do not underestimate the power of the ‘cry’ by the progs (progressives) when they start to bawl their heads off WHEN their schiest hits the fan. Normies and progs are in abusive, inseparable relationship b/c of the power fed gov has assumed (and the democrats have dealt themselves in the form of fed govt oversight and control).
. . . produces 9% of the energy used by California’s nearly 40 million inhabitants,
Slight error here. It produced 8% of the electricity used in CA in 2023. I think electricity represents about 20% of CA energy use, so that comes out to about 1.6% of CA energy consumption.
Doesn’t concern me one bit. Everybody knows CA has gone crazy.They will hopefully serve as an example to the rest of the country of how not to do things.
I agree with your point as a general principle. However we are talking about electricity. The amount of energy that is used by CA’s ICEV cars and trucks doesn’t make much difference in terms of whether or not the grid collapses.
CA Democrats have never worried about costs before. I wonder why they can’t support keeping Diablo Canyon running? 🙂
Especially since it is already paid for including the cost of decommissioning. Diablo was designed to operate until 2050. Its costs and maintenance were all known before construction. It is only the unknown political costs added afterward that make it a problem to operate.
However, as Gray Davis found out, the political costs of delivering no power at all are much more expensive, especially for politicians with presidential aspirations in charge at the time of power collapse. That’s why Newsom has backtracked on its premature closure and supported continued operation, which was a 180 degree shift in his former position.
Warmunist: If we don’t have nut zero by 2035, the planet is going to boil and all life on earth is going to be extinct
Sensible person: Well, we ought use nuclear power which produces electricity 24/7/365 without CO2 emissions.
Warmunist: That is too expensive.
Sensible person: Stares at feet and makes imaginary snowballs with his hands.
In the land of fruits and nuts there obviously are plenty of both. They will all richly deserve the depredations coming their way and of their own doing.
AS is proof that the country is tilted to the west. All the fruits and nuts have rolled there.
“produces 9% of the energy used by California’s nearly 40 million inhabitants”
Can’t say anthing more important.
Is the 9% electrical energy? I doubt that it represents 9% of total energy used by the state.
California is being so stupid that I am in favor of not only shutting down Diablo but also all fossil fuel generators in California. I would also outlaw the importation of either fossil fuel or nuclear power into California. We need to give these people what they want.
I agree.. the sooner one of these “Net-Zero” regions has to suffer big time due to lack of reliable electricity supply, the better for all the world.
But would it be enough to wake people up…
… we have seen just how little some politicians care about their countries and the people living there..
The shutdown of Diablo Canyon won’t impact just California. More stress will be placed on the Western Interconnect as California seeks to import more power.
The Western Electricity Coordination Council (WECC) is in the process of establishing a policy which will force any generation resource attached to the Western Interconnect to supply power whenever a sub-region within the grid falls short.
In theory, the US Northwest has some limited excess hydropower capacity which might be tapped to feed the Western Interconnect if power supplies get tight. (In theory.) For awhile, at least.
Some of the experts I talk to here in Washington State are telling me that if Diablo Canyon goes down, the probability of near-term blackouts here in the US Northwest goes up.
California Democrats are idiots. Where do they expect to find the 9% of the energy produced by Diablo Canyon? And don’t say out of state because that source is already maxed out. We are lead by people who think by just saying something, it will magically happen.
At 1620 MST, 6/16/2024, Diablo Canyon is producing 2,270 MW of power, virtually it’s maximum. For about 20% of the time over the past 18 months it has had one of it’s generators shut down for whatever reason; output drops to around 1,140 MW.
From the daily graphs, it’s more like CA is depending on imported power to get along. At peak of solar generation “Import” goes negative. When they get the new line finished (“…from a sub-station near Tonopah, Arizona to Blyth”…) we’ll see what happens. (Sub-station? They can’t admit that is linked to a nuclear power plant.)
An oldie but a goody (5 yrs in internet-years is a long time) –
“Economics of Nuclear Reactor” by Illinois Energy Professor