Dear Governor Newsom, California Legislators and CPUC
As you all well know, we are in the midst of an existential climate crisis and California and the whole world faces dire consequences if we do not significantly reduce emissions from energy and other human activities as quickly as possible. Furthermore, AB32, signed into law by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, charged the state with converting to clean energy both expeditiously and at least cost possible. The only rational way to fulfill this mandate as written in the law is to preserve existing sources of clean energy, shut down carbon-emitting energy sources and build enough new clean energy sources to replace the dirty energy that we shuttered.
But you are not doing that. Instead, you are forcing Diablo Canyon to close prematurely. Commissioned in 1985 at a cost of over $15 billion (in today’s dollars), Diablo Canyon provides more clean energy in California than any other single source of power and has operated with almost 100% reliability and unblemished safety for 36 years. California needs to shutter coal, oil, natural gas and then biofuels (which emit carbon dioxide) on a priority basis. Yet, for inexplicable reasons, those in power have decided that this is the moment to target and prematurely shutter the state’s largest source of clean energy.
We find this decision incredibly short-sighted on climate, wrong-headed economically and ultimately counter-productive to our state’s urgent need to decarbonize everything our grid as quickly as possible. Already, new carbon-emitting gas and diesel plants have has been planned to replace Diablo Canyon’s clean output. While shutting Diablo clearly enriches the vested interests of the parties that want to capture that market share, this unnecessarily robs Californians of the benefits of an asset that they have paid for over decades. Decommissioning and replacing existing clean nuclear energy with renewable clean energy will cost an estimated $21 billion extra to replace existing clean energy with more clean energy—providing no climate benefit at all. This money would be much better spent replacing sources of dirty energy.
PG&E had already commenced with its NRC license renewal process, when they were held up by a political gang of bad actors. Then Governor Brown, whose family holds financial interests in the expansion of natural gas, and several non-representative, antinuclear and anti-science groups arrived at a back-room deal that forced PG&E to close the plant. Then, the CPUC agreed to approve this plan, against the public’s interest, despite knowing that this would destroy the public’s investment in this critical climate asset. Efforts to demand that Diablo’s clean, carbon-free energy be replaced entirely with other sources of clean energy were rebuffed as impossible. Now the CPUC is already commissioning new fossil fuel plants, and planning increased imports from coal and natural gas. All the while, this insane decision is being hailed by environmentalists as a good thing.
We need better leadership than that. Archaic antagonism towards nuclear power stemming from propaganda spread in the 70s and 80s and which only survives due to the willful denial of the facts and data of nuclear’s stellar performance (as proven out over its now sixty years of operating experience) should not be the basis for this decision. These same parties have conspired to deprive Diablo Canyon of having a level playing field for its sale of nuclear energy into CAISO auctions under California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). They accuse nuclear power of being expensive—yet California sees natural gas spikes, never nuclear price spikes.
No form of energy production is “carbon-free” and lifecycle emissions of nuclear are as low as or lower than wind and solar. The RPS unfairly and erroneously prioritizes use of “renewable” energy, some of which emit carbon, and excludes Diablo’s clean energy. Not including nuclear enegy in the RPS, rather than properly valuing and prioritizing Diablo’s carbon-free energy, violates the mandates of SB 100. Together with other politically-motivated legislative attacks on Diablo that changed the game rules for Diablo’s water cooling discharge systems, antinuclear forces have created an environment which pressured PG&E to agree to prematurely close this climate critical power plant well before its useful life is over.
California’s SB100 requires the state to achieve 100% clean energy by 2045 from a combination of renewables and other types of clean energy—inclusive of nuclear power. Diablo Canyon would qualify to meet SB100’s clean energy standard—which is why its opponents seek to rush its closure. This is entirely unacceptable, wasteful and, as highlighted by the recent report from experts at Stanford and MIT assessing this decision, will cost to California an estimated $21 billion.
As climate-concerned citizens of California and non-resident supporters, we are petitioning to demand that California’s leaders Save our Clean Energy and extend Diablo Canyon’s operation. This may mean giving PG&E an indefinite waiver on new environmental rules imposed since it commenced operations. Diablo Canyon must be allowed to produce its carbon-free energy until deemed unsafe by the NRC. We need both its clean energy and its reliable, high-capacity performance in order to reduce our GHG emissions with the least impact to grid reliability. Shuttering this plant prematurely will virtually guarantee that we miss our climate goals, decrease grid reliability and increase our reliance on burning fossil fuels, all while costing unnecessary billions.
Fortunately, the U.S. Congress, recognizing that we need to preserve nuclear power, recently passed the Biden Infrastructure Bill that provides financial support to at-risk nuclear power plants. We further ask that the state seek to secure funds to enable PG&E to restart its NRC application and be allowed to immediately resume planning future operations for Diablo. Until rules that provide equal priority with other carbon-free sources are passed, California should provide a Zero Emission Credit to Diablo Canyon to ensure that it is not disadvantaged by CAISO rules that pay renewables for “capacity” but not nuclear. California’s object should be reducing GHG emissions by all reasonable means. Diablo is critical for that goal. Californian ratepayers have paid for Diablo Canyon over many decades, it has provided cost-effective carbon-free power for decades and we need it to continue to do so to keep California’s grid reliable until California no longer generates any carbon emissions from its use of either in-state or out-of-state energy generation.
Please use the Comment Box below to add your name to this petition
Please sign your support as an individual below using the comment box. Feel free to provide your full name, affiliation and credentials, along with any comment to be published. While the final language of the petition may be edited to a certain extent, it will not substantially deviate from what you see above. However, we will send you a link to the final draft prior to formally sending this petition to the Governor and other named parties. Thank you for your support.
To sign on behalf of an organization, please use this link and we will add your organization to a listing of supporting organizations.
[Please note: We welcome your comments and edits on our Google Doc draft here.]
As someone that loves this planet and loves how clean energy has improved my life, I fully support this.
When will this very useful petition be submitted to the CA Governor and Legislators?
Here are two of the key findings from the October 2021 Stanford/MIT study which are highly relevant:
“- Delaying the retirement of Diablo Canyon to 2035 would reduce California power sector carbon emissions by more than 10% from 2017 levels and reduce reliance on gas, save $2.6 Billion in power system costs, and bolster system reliability to mitigate brownouts; if operated to 2045 and beyond, Diablo Canyon could save up to $21 Billion in power system costs and spare 90,000 acres of land from use for energy production, while meeting coastal protection requirements.
– Operating Diablo Canyon as a polygeneration facility—with coordinated and varying production of electricity, desalinated water, and clean hydrogen—could provide multiple services to California, including grid reliability as needed, and further increase the value of the Diablo Canyon electricity plant by nearly 50% (and more, if water prices were to substantially increase under conditions of worsening drought).”
Closing an existing, safe, well run, nuclear energy plant, given all that we now know about California’s ongoing struggle to meet its own clean energy climate goals, is the height of folly. We need to save Diablo Canyon and expand its capabilities for the benefit of the people of California!
John,
We are continuing to put together a comprehensive strategy and hope to gather many more signatories through an array of mechanisms, working with as many constituents as possible. Meanwhile, the team’s focus has turned toward trying to save the Palisades plant from a planned closure this spring. Please support that campaign effort here: https://protectnuclearnow.org/support/.
We can’t let freak accidents like Fukumshima to sway us away from what is clearly the correct path to being less reliant on coal/natural. Do not close the Diablo Canyon. Build more with thorium in mind.
Nuclear is a dependable and working option to combat climate change. Ignoring this fact and closing the plant only works against the stated goal of reducing CO2 emissions.
I support resuming a rational and cost-effective approach to achieving net zero in California and it starts with preserving all of our existing and paid for clean energy—especially Diablo Canyon—and building enough more additional clean sources that we can shutter all of the gas and coal plants (or better yet, convert them to advanced nuclear).
Save Diablo Canyon please!
Save Diablo Canyon!
Not a major concern, but suggest not referring to nuclear as “carbon free” and softening some of the wording. I submitted some edits to consider to Valerie’s email – partly to respond to Valerie’s mention that it may be useful to try to shorten – knocked off about 100 words. I will sign regardless. Hope this is helpful.
Fred, excellent edits! Implemented most all and appreciate your superb editing skills.
The Climate Coalition urges the Governor, the Legislature and the CPUC to take climate more seriously than you clearly are. We don’t have the luxury to shutter clean energy and add more dirty energy. That is a recipe for failure and not the leadership that will ensure that we succeed in meeting our mandated state goals. Please save our clean energy and correct the order of operations so that we shutter dirty energy first before you agree to sacrifice any of our clean energy sources.