3 ms·
The entire state of California is not on a fault line. Surely there's some seismically-stable places in the state where such plants could be built. I agree, A
by midoridensha 3y ago
The entire state of California is not on a fault line. Surely there's some seismically-stable places in the state where such plants could be built.
I agree, America has no business building a nuclear plant anywhere near a fault line. But America isn't like Japan: there's tons of safe places within American territory where there's almost no risk of significant earthquakes. The same isn't true in Japan.
- NPC82 3y agoI am referencing specifically Diablo canyon since it was mentioned in the article, but a lot of energy plants need huge water sources. This is either for emergency procedures or efficiency which makes them attractive to build pretty much anywhere there's ocean or water - which happens to be where most fault lines are in California.
- midoridensha 3y agoOk, but (layman here) my understanding is that nuclear plants don't need water; they can use cooling towers instead. I think America's largest plant, for instance, is in the Arizona desert (Palo Verde).
- jaggederest 3y agoCooling towers use water. Nothing compares to the efficiency of evapotranspiration in terms of cooling potential. "[Palo Verde] evaporates the water from the treated sewage from several nearby cities and towns to provide the cooling of the steam that it produces." - according to Wiki
- midoridensha 3y agoOk, but some treated sewage doesn't seem like it's even close to the volume of water you get in a river. Of course, the Phoenix area is a really big city with 5M people.
- downrightmike 3y agoPalo Verde was a concern last year because of the massive 1000 year drought causing concern about not having enough water to run. But FYI nearly all power generation is just creating steam through heating water to turn a steam turbine to create power. Same method as a coal plant.