3 ms·
The tone of the article is not very objective at all. Especially not in the way it characterizes the environmentalist movement. It appears that this nuclear pla
by bjourne 4y ago
The tone of the article is not very objective at all. Especially not in the way it characterizes the environmentalist movement. It appears that this nuclear plant in California will stay open because president Biden has signed a bill that will ensure that the plant will receive federal bailout money to keep operating. I.e Americans not living in California will subsidize California's nuclear plant. Hard to frame that as a massive win for nuclear.
- ncmncm 4y agoAs literally always, nukes supported with coerced money.
- aerostable_slug 4y agoDCPP is not going to stay open. That bridge was crossed long ago, and it's difficult to imagine a realistic scenario where the plant gets relicensed and power purchase agreements are guaranteed such that running DCPP remains profitable even with California's renewables mandates. Renewing a plant's license is like building a rate case (which takes years), but harder. It takes time and money and we don't have enough of either to succeed, no matter what Biden or Newsom claim. NRC could waive certain things to speed it up but they won't (nor should they). FWIW, I live just a few miles from DCPP, have been onsite there a number of times when I worked for PG&E, and I sleep very well at night. PG&E may have screwed up in a lot of ways over the years, but DCPP is a well-run facility and it's a shame it has to close prematurely (lots of life left in that plant).
- ncmncm 4y agoCoercing elevated rates to pay for keeping it open would be a deal as bad as paying federal taxes to help prop it up. DC cannot compete on price even already built, ignoring capex.