We were giving an interview down in front of the nuclear power plant. The reporter was surprised that we could get so close to the plant and at how low the Tsunami Wall actually was. I told him we could take a walk for a closer look. After reaching the midpoint we stopped and did some more interviewing and picture taking. There was an unusual turbulent release of water just 20 yards out into
the ocean. I've never seen anything like that out of the many times I've
been there. Then the loudspeakers came on announcing some kind of issue down at Gate 4. That is when we started feeling like maybe we should get out of there and sure enough, the next announcement was for us to leave and to stop taking pictures. That is the first time I've ever been acknowledged when down there, so I'm actually relieved to know someone is starting to pay more attention to unusual activities in front of the plant. When we arrived back at the cars we were met by the heavily armed security guard who insisted I stop filming because of the "S.I." equipment he was wearing. It would have been rather intimidating if he wasn't 70 years old. He took the reporters information and was actually quite nice. He happened to mention that there had been some kind of minor accident (or injury?) at the plant and with that bit of news we were happy to be on our way. So far, no news about what the security guard was referring to but I intend to find out if possible.
There is no official word yet, but the rumor from insiders at the plant is that the problem with the new generators may be very time consuming and difficult to resolve. It seems that the
tubes have been configured in such a way as to have unintentionally
created a situation where water passes through the tubes at such a high velocity that it
causes the kind of wear they would expect to see after 20 to 30 years of
service. If true, ratepayers could be on the hook for huge
repair and replacement costs in order to extend the life of the plant
beyond its intended lifespan, and even then, reliability will be in
question.
It was also stated that ruptured tubes under high pressure can result
in a chain reaction causing adjacent tubes to rupture if not stopped in
time, with potentially
catastrophic results.
Another point stressed was that standard procedures were violated if they
discovered the problem in Unit 2's tubes when it was being serviced
before the leak occurred in Unit 3. When a failure of any critical
system is discovered it is the responsibility of the plant operator to
make the conservative decision to shutdown and inspect any "like
components". In this case it appears that this was not done for the
exact duplicate components in Unit 3.
I also got word that many workers inside the plant are secretively supportive of
decommissioning and wish us on the outside success in doing
what they can only hope for while clinging to their jobs. To that I say
thanks for the encouragement, and thanks for doing your best to keep us
all safe, but it is time for them to do a little soul searching. There
is too much at stake to be thinking of your own security. Now is the
time to let your concerns be known publicly.
Email these people. Ken Alex (nuclear point man for Gov Brown) at http://www.cp-dr.com/contact < span="">>; Lori Donchak ; Tim Brown ; Bob Baker ; PatBates@ocgov.com,
This a sample letter about our new push to get gov't to work for the people. For Ken Alex you will need to go to the website and put your letter in, because you cannot direct email him. Please come to San Clemente City Hall on Feb 21 at 6 pm to once again ask for action and to have this matter put on the agenda.
The citizens of San Clemente, Orange County and California are asking our elected officials to do the proper steps to ensure the safety of its citizens by taking responsibility to set up a radiation monitoring system around San Onofre Waste Generating Station. SONGS has had many safety violations and close calls. According to the NRC stats SONGS has the worst safety record of all hundred four reactors in America. http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-340798-plan-san.html
We as citizens feel it is time for the City of San Clemente government, Orange County government and California government to act responsibly and provide accurate radiation monitoring that is easily accessed by the public so that we may be informed as to what is leaking and at what level and how much we are being exposed to by this old deteriorating nuclear power plant. In conjunction with this request we believe it is time that the above government agencies provide an epidemiology study to inform the public what the affect of California's two nuclear power plants over these many years has had on our health?
Now we have another new problem at SONGS;
"Radiation levels in the plant’s cooling system [Unit 2] doubled from January to February 2011 and continued to climb through the end of the year.
..increasing levels of radiation in the water that cools the reactor probably indicates that the metal tubes (called cladding) that contain its fuel pellets are cracking.”
Before you read this, I'd just like to point out that this is DAY 17 without any nuclear power coming from San Onofre, and the lights are still on. I think maybe they need us more than we need them.
Mayor and Councilmembers,
After coming so far on the issues
surrounding nuclear power, I am deeply disappointed that none of you
took the time to even respond to our recent requests on this pressing
topic. This Tuesday’s city council meeting has a light agenda and could
have been the perfect opportunity to consider our concerns and come to
some decision in your official capacity.
Our first request was
to direct staff to look into having a Radiation Monitoring Station
in San Clemente. Secondly, we wanted you to investigate the possibility
of having an Epidemiological Study done to determine if there
are any indications that we have an unusual number of health problems
which might be related to radiation exposure. Thirdly, we simply wanted
you to participate with us in our Fukushima Remembered event to
honor those lost and still suffering from the devastating earthquake and
tsunami of 3/11/11.
I can't understand why none of these
requests measured up to the level of significance that might be worthy
of your response. We currently are awaiting the news from Edison
about how much radiation may have been released based on the extent of
damage to the new generator tubes at San Onofre. France has recently
released reports of higher incidences of cancer around nuclear power
plants, especially amongst children. Japan continues to suffer the
consequences of politicians and government agencies neglecting their
responsibilities to consider public safety above the will of the
industry. How is it that these revelations do not resonate in your
hearts and minds when your public repeatedly brings them to your
attention?
Again, we ask you to place these matters of great
concern to many of the residents of San Clemente on your next agenda.
Please find it within your fiduciary responsibility to act wisely and
swiftly. Today there was a news report in Reuters where Japan's former
Premier expressed how 3/11 changed his way of thinking about nuclear
power.
Prime Minister Naoto Kan said, “The Fukushima crisis
destroyed the myth that atomic energy is safe, cheap and clean and
prompted Japan to scrap a plan to boost its share of electricity demand
to more than half by 2030. While many technological measures can be
taken to secure safety at nuclear power plants, such measures on their
own cannot cover great risks," said Kan, sitting in front of a
calligraphy scroll inscribed with the ancient Chinese proverb "Be
Brave, But Not Reckless".
Kan's defenders say a key cause
of his downfall was his call to wean Japan from nuclear power -- a
stance popular with the public but opposed by many including politically
powerful utilities.
(see full article here)
(Total shutdown continues due
to failing new
generators which cost us $680 Million)
I asked this question of a whistle blower who was a licensed nuclear
operator at San Onofre and got the following explanation...
All providers of electricity from any source feed power into the
Western United States Grid. The grid is managed and operated by the
California Independent System Operator (CAISO) who directs power where
it is needed. Power is constantly being pushed into the grid,
circulating a margin of power that exceeds consumption, providing us
with a constant buffer. Only that which is consumed gets metered and
results in compensation to the provider.
Small scale providers using natural gas, hydro, wind and solar are in
less demand because they are competing with nuclear power which has
artificially lower expenses due to subsidies and other invisible burdens
carried by society. Nuclear
power must run at full capacity 24/7 because that is the nature of this
technology. It can’t be dialed up or down to adjust to fluctuations in
demand, so it just sits there churning out power regardless of how much
actually gets used.
Now that our nuclear power source is in complete shutdown mode,
the other sources of electricity are able to charge SCE a premium to
meet their obligations. This is good business for the smaller
independent providers, giving them a larger share of the market. While
this may sound bad for the ratepayers who always get stuck with the
bill, it demonstrates the financial exposure we face by relying on
nuclear power, let alone the many other well known risks of using
radiation to boil water. The fact is that the $640 million invested in each of the failing
generators came out of our pockets, as will the expenses to repair or
replace them (if we allow it). We use nuclear
power because it is available, not because we need it. We
blindly accept the risk of a Fukushima scale disaster because we are led
to believe we would have to endure blackouts and huge financial losses
without it. The industry likes to claim that they provide Californians
with 19% of our energy, but according to data (see attached) from the
California Public Utility Commission (CPUC), there would still be a
buffer of excess power available from other sources if we did not use
nuclear power at all. Truly sustainable energy providers would enjoy
financial stability leading to more rapid advances in technology getting
us closer to energy independence and addressing climate change while
creating jobs and a better economy. It is time to demand that the
CPUC steps in on behalf of ratepayers and put an end to this literal
abuse of power. A small group of individuals reap the benefits of huge
profits and undue influence at the expense of many. They will run these
nuclear power plants until we force them to shutdown or allow them to
meltdown. What
more proof is required to understand that we don’t need them after
having no nuclear power for 19 days and counting?Let’s
move on to a cleaner, safer and more prosperous future.
Even if we had to be a little more careful about how we waste energy
in order to avoid excessive demands on the grid during the summer we can definitely get by
without nuclear power in California. Don't believe what
the industry is telling us about the hardships it would create.
We are having “Fukushima Remembered” on 3/10 with guest speakers from
Fukushima and a protest at the plant on 3/11, the first anniversary of the
tragedy in Japan. Sign up here to be updated on
our activities. We are counting on big numbers to offset the big money acting
for profit above safety. Please share our message with others and make a donation if you can. Thanks!
