Comments on: Greens targeting last CA nuclear plant

By: JimmyDeeOC

JimmyDeeOC — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 21:04:30 +0000

In reply to Ghettoman. The long term future of this state is toast. Ohh there will still be plenty of Tech and VC to go around, so public finances will be fairly well met and we won't be like Detroit or Puerto Rico, but unless you are a tech 1%-er , the quality of life for most of us ham&eggers declines with each passing year. That's not doomer speak. That's just observable fact.

By: Ghettoman

Ghettoman — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:50:41 +0000

As a lifelong san diegan I am ashamed to drive by San Onofre and see this huge power plant sitting there due to government stupidity and ignorance. To simply wipeout this massive technology by turning off a useful source of power due to steam generators is assinine. As a engineer who has friends who work there the repairs could have been done and if the correct steam generators were used then it would be up and running today. Look around you and you will see a increasing population in so-cal, more power outages and more people moving into our great areas. The idea that solar, geothermal or any other source is going to help is ludicrous! This plant is already there and needs repair, just like any other huge machine! Let the men here fix it and get moving and lets get real. We need those 3000 jobs back and we need power now! If the idiots in Sacramento get there way we will have no water storage, no power for our homes, more food stamps, and more driver licenses for non productive illegals! Nice future?

By: Bill Gore

Bill Gore — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 05:12:51 +0000

“We really need to have a low-carbon, base load source of electricity,”
We Do!!!! And it is called GEOTHERMAL. Repeat: GEOTHERMAL. And California is particularly rich in cheap easy to drill geothermal resources! GEOTHERMAL is CLEAN GREEN BASELOAD. It does NOT produce waste that threatens life on earth!!!
Someone explain what is this INSANE BIAS against geothermal. PLEASE. Nuclear is a stark raving NIGHTMARE….

By: Ronald Stein

Ronald Stein — Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:49:10 +0000

Major strides are taking place with alternative energies, but the major hurdle for alternatives is the cost of competing with the price of oil. An article several years ago in the Wall Street Journal by Keith Johnson describes the break even numbers:

Geothermal breaks even when crude oil is at $57
Nuclear power breaks even when crude oil is at $69
Onshore wind power breaks even when crude oil is at $92
Offshore wind power breaks even when crude oil is at $189
Solar thermal breaks even when crude oil is at $393
Natural gas breaks even when crude oil is at $657

Today, crude oil is less than $50 a barrel.

The break even number is a partial cause as to why alternatives they cannot come on line fast enough or at the scale required to replace current energy sources for several decades. The optimistic outlook in 2030 is that our energy sources will still be about 80% dependent on crude oil, coal and natural gas.

More infrastructure and transmission lines may be required to bring Solar and Wind green power back from the desert to where the homes and businesses are located.
• The green power options may NOT be available 24/7 as green power relies on Mother Nature’s sun and wind.
• Other power plants such as fossil fuel and natural gas, that can provide 24/7 power will produce more metric tons of smog producing pollutants, and more metric tons of carbon emissions.

The choices are MORE emissions, and MORE costly energy, but hopefully the SILENT majority of the homes and businesses that will be breathing those extra emissions and paying higher costs for power, and not just the few vocal minority, will be able to make those choices.