3 ms·
Personally I don't support it because the plant is on an earthquake fault, the design lifetime of that plant is near the end of life anyway, upgrade of nuclear
by dv_dt 6y ago
Personally I don't support it because the plant is on an earthquake fault, the design lifetime of that plant is near the end of life anyway, upgrade of nuclear plants has gone bad in CA before[1], and finally the upgrade resources could be better applied to renewable resources.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_...
- takeda 6y agoAlso don't forget that it is run by PG&E.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Fjolsvith 6y agoWith rolling blackouts.
- cbmuser 6y agoPlants can operate well beyond their planned lifespan: > https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/whats-lifespan-nuclear-reactor-much-longer-you-might-think https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/whats-lifespan-nuclear-re...
- dv_dt 6y agoCan is not the same as should. Between economic and risk considerations, Diablo canyon has been judged as a case of should not.