FOE continues promoting fossil fuel by trying to force Diablo Canyon closure

As a literature major during my undergraduate years, I was fascinated by the variety of stories that can be told about the same topic depending on the author’s selected point of view.

Here is a brief example. Friends of the Earth (FOE) has a page on its web site titled Shutting down Diablo Canyon. The first couple of paragraphs tell a brief story about the organization, its founding, and its position on Diablo Canyon that has been widely promoted and is probably accepted by many of its dedicated members.

Concerns over the proposed construction of nuclear reactors at Diablo Canyon were an impetus for David Brower to found Friends of Earth in 1969. Since then, more information about the seismic activity near the two aging reactors has made it increasingly clear that Diablo Canyon should never have been built on its current site. The tremendous and unnecessary risk these reactors pose to public health and the environment necessitates that they be shut down.

At the time of construction, our knowledge about earthquakes was relatively basic. Nonetheless, it was known that Diablo Canyon, the nuclear reactors operated by Pacific Gas & Electric, was at risk from two earthquake faults: the San Andreas, 45 miles inland and the Rinconada, 20 miles inland. Since then, as our understanding of earthquakes and ground motion has grown, it has become increasingly clear that Diablo Canyon is surrounded by faults capable of creating ground motion beyond that for which the reactors and their components were tested and licensed.

I would tell the same story in a different way because I have a different set of experiences, research and personal opinion lenses through which I view the world. Here is my version.

Concerns over the construction and operation of nuclear reactors that do not consume any hydrocarbon products were a call to action on the part of those whose business was to sell hydrocarbons. Though their products would continue to be useful in a world with a rapidly increasing quantity of power supplied by atomic fission, the unit sale prices would be negatively impacted by the resulting change in the balance between energy supply and demand. The industry’s profitability and long-standing ability to dominate international politics would be dramatically reduced.

Robert Anderson, the CEO of Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) and a recognized leader in the petroleum industry, went looking for a credible spokesperson with an established following who could criticize nuclear energy and initiate action to mitigate some of its obvious competitive advantages. Anderson learned that David Brower, a prominent environmentalist and influencer at the Sierra Club, was involved in a leadership struggle at his organization, partly because he wanted to take a more aggressive stance against the use of nuclear energy.

Anderson made contact with Brower. He soon provided the initial donation of $200,000 that enabled Brower to found a new, more focused antinuclear environmental group, Friends of the Earth. Other people involved in the hydrocarbon business provided additional ammunition in the battle to increase the cost of nuclear energy construction by performing additional seismic surveys of the area near the Diablo Canyon construction site. They timed the release of information raising questions about the site stability so that the revelations resulted in substantial plant redesign work and years/billions worth of project delays.

Not surprisingly, Anderson did not publicly oppose nuclear energy himself. That would have been easily identified as special interest pleading by a competitor. It was much more effective to publicly proclaim support of nuclear energy while quietly providing the funds to enable “environmental” activists to attack and spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about the technology and the industry that was developing it.

It’s worth mentioning that there has never been a case anywhere in the world in which a nuclear power plant sustained enough damage from an earthquake to cause it to endanger the public. They are exceedingly resilient facilities.

Despite the efforts by its well-heeled and motivated opponents, the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant was completed and licensed to operate. It now produces between 17 and 18 terawatt-hours of electricity every year. It has done so for decades and has the capability to continue doing so for numerous additional decades.

Replacing that amount of electricity with the best available natural gas power plant technology would result in the release of at least 6.2 million tons of CO2 every year. It is not possible to replace that steadily produced, grid stabilizing, adjustable power factor, smooth frequency AC power with a combination of wind turbines and solar panels.

Shockingly (not really), one of the prominent allies in the still active antinuclear movement effort to close Diablo Canyon and replace it with power mostly produced by burning products of the petroleum industry — in this case, natural gas — was a petroleum industry geologist, former California state senator Sam Blakeslee.

Additional evidence

This is supplemental information aimed at supporting the assertions made in my version of the history of opposition to Diablo Canyon.

Hosgri Fault Zone USGS

Exploration of the offshore Santa Maria Basin began in the 1960s with regional seismic surveys, marine gravity surveys, and aeromagnetic surveys designed to identify the limits of the basin and the major structural features. In 1971, geologists from the Shell Oil Company published a paper in which they were the first authors to identify a major fault zone offshore south-central California (Hoskins and Griffiths, 1971). Their interpretation of the fault was based on analyses of widely spaced CDP seismic reflection data. Figure 2 in their report is a small-scale map that shows a continuous offshore fault trace extending from south of Point Sal approximately 140 km to the north end of the Piedras Blancas Structure. They do not characterize the nature of the fault nor provide any indication of the recency of activity.
Source: US Geologic Survey (USGS) Characterization of the Hosgri Fault Zone and Adjacent Structures in the Offshore Santa Maria Basin page 4

This screenshot (click to enlarge) shows a damning page from a book titled Environmentalism: Ideology and Power by Donald Gibson, published by Nova Science Publishers in 2002.

Environmentalism Ideology and Power

WISE and NIRS promoting twisted campaign with slogan “Don’t nuke the climate”

It has been a long standing absurdity that the clean development mechanisms approved by the Kyoto treaty to reduce the risk of climate change exclude nuclear energy. This year there is momentum building to reevaluate and change a rule that virtually eliminates the option for nations to use the most effective tool available to permanently […]

Read more »

Tale of two Chinas – One surging forward, one retreating

Two stories caught my attention this morning. One came from the Taipei Times, one from the Beijing Review. The first one focused on a future energy supply prognostication from an American “expert” who has a light educational and professional background in energy technology, manufacturing, engineering, economics and market dynamics. The second one documents recent progress […]

Read more »

Participation opportunity – Turkey Point EIS public meeting

One of the most prolific anti-nuclear activist groups, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE), is distributing posts encouraging their followers to oppose FP&L’s plan to build two new reactors at the Turkey Point Power station. SACE is encouraging people to submit negative comments via the public comment process for the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) […]

Read more »

Atomic Show #237 – Dave Lochbaum, UCS

On March 26, 2015, published a story titled Perry refuels its nuclear reactor, critics concerned about storage (photos). The story described how a group of activists had tried to generate concerns and actions in response to First Energy’s decision to improve the Perry plant by adopting fuel designed to provide more energy per fuel […]

Read more »

Contradicting Arjun Makhijani’s claim about bombs from power reactors

On March 3, 2015, Arjun Makhijani testified in front of a committee of the Minnesota Senate. The committee was conducting an investigation on whether or not it should recommend lifting the state’s current moratorium on building new nuclear reactors. Here is the presentation that he prepared and delivered. During his recorded testimony, Makhijani falsely stated […]

Read more »

Irish people should ignore Arnie Gundersen because he’s wrong

A friend who often gets involved in discussions about nuclear energy stories with frightened people in his social media network contacted me to find out what I thought of an article titled Nuclear plant could be a ‘Chernobyl on steroids,’ says expert. Then the same story showed up on one of my daily news feeds. […]

Read more »

Nuclear industry must remember that all politics are local

Copyright 2005 Jim Zimmerlin. All rights reserved

There aren’t very many people who can claim to more in favor of nuclear energy than I am. There are, however, many whose passion and amateur dedication to the technology equal mine. Unfortunately, both the nuclear industry and the regulatory agency that oversees the industry often overlook the fact that people who oppose nuclear energy […]

Read more »

Agencies should not allow creation of a hostile environment at public meetings

On February 19, 2015, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) transported a substantial contingent of regulators to Brattleboro, VT to hold a public meeting about Entergy’s Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) for the permanently shutdown Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. Brattleboro Community TV produced a video record of the event. Watching that video is […]

Read more »

Should groups that celebrate loss of 600 MWe of reliable, ultra-low emission nuclear be called “environmental?”

Greenpeace USA published a blog post on December 22, a week before the scheduled shutdown of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station titled ONE LESS FUKUSHIMA-TYPE NUCLEAR REACTOR THREATENING THE U.S. that celebrates the fact that New England is losing another reliable, natural gas-free, CO2-free, electricity production facility. The blog’s author, Jim Riccio, is proud […]

Read more »

Potentially huge news – Branson’s Carbon War Room merging with Lovins’s Rocky Mountain Institute

Update: (Video embed added Dec 18, 02:13 am) An organization that wants to harness the power of science, technology and free enterprise to solve climate change — which their CEO describes as “the single biggest priority for mankind” — cannot possibly remain adamantly opposed to the use of nuclear energy as a powerful tool. The […]

Read more »