Posted on 06/07/2013 8:15:11 AM PDT by kidd
Southern California Edison, a unit of California power company Edison International, decided to permanently retire the San Onofre nuclear power plant, forcing California to find other electric sources to help keep the lights on in the future.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
It’s going to be a long hot summer.
YES!!!
Another bonehead move by the liberals. We’ll all be throwing spears soon.
And then be an abject failure. Go greenies.
Isn’t the People’s Democratic Republic of California running a bit short in power generate capability?
We need a video with the the Electric Nazi:
“no juice for you!”
(I'm sorry, was that racist?)
As long as they can replace with natural gas, combined cycle with 50% thermal efficiency; rate payers should actually save.
But to depend on one primary fuel source, that is not stored at the generating plant; is risky. Pipeline failures do occur and we know what it is like to make improvements on pipelines.
Heh heh. “amped up”.
“...So, I’m guessin’ coal ain’t on the list....”
Ummmmmmmm....no.
I worked out there for a few months on a couple of combined-cycle gas plants during the “Gray Slave-us” administration. We were at Moss Landing Power Station just north of Monterrey. They had a couple of old 1000MW oil-fired units there that they PGE had to convert to natural gas and take the de-rate on. PGE had to pay all the surrounding residents some kind of stipend due to burning oil. PGE had sold the site to Duke Energy.
So nuclear is now out, oil is out, coal is out.
Surrounding states should refuse to sell them power..and water.
When I was there, there were rolling blackouts almost every day. Yet, we still had to fend our way thru the plant gate every day because of a bunch of old hippie protesters out there every morning and evening.
IMHO, CA doesn’t even deserve electricity. I wouldn’t trade a square inch of south Texas desert for the whole damn state. I’ll never go back there.
If you’re conservative and live there, I feel for ya.
Sort of.
SONGS, and three independent firms, had completed numerous safety evaluations that showed that SONGS-2 could operate at 70% power safely.
A member of the NRC (Emmett Murphy) looked at the license for SONGS and noted that it could only operate if the plant was capable of operating at full power. While operating at a lesser power is less of a strain on the plant, it was nevertheless outside of its license criteria.
SCE asked for a license ammendment. By law, such an ammendment is subject to public hearings.
Technically, the NRC followed the law. In fact, I’d say the NRC was leaning in favor of getting SONGS-2 to restart.
However, for reasons that I’m not clear about, the NRC was going to allow a series of public hearings on the SONGS license ammendment. SCE must have thought that spending more money to respond to public hearing queries would be prohibitively expensive.
Yes. They need a cool wet summer.
But even if that happens, there is no room for growth. Which screws up the state's long term economic plans.
It’s only supposed to be 108° Saturday /s
mark
Somebody on ABCNEWS.COM said it was worth the upcoming black outs and increased electrical bills as long as we get rid of all nuclear plants. IDIOTS!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.