Friday, March 30, 2012


         Temecula, CA – Today the story is that the nuclear plant just over the western hills and directly in our valley’s almost daily wind stream, San Onofre, is catching the attention of more concerned citizens (see recent NIMBY nuclear story here for the safety record of the nation’s worse operating facility and why). KTLA, channel 5 released the following report just today.
        ‘Concern over the safety of the San Onofre nuclear power plant is growing among Orange County cities closest to the facility, which has been shut down since January because of system failures. "San Onofre is being operated safely -- that's the bottom line," said Victor Dricks, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, came the retort. (Where does old Victor live, um?- Ed)
         Officials in nearby San Clemente and Laguna Beach -- both within 20 miles of the San Onofre facility -- have registered their fears after significant wear was found on hundreds of tubes carrying radioactive water inside the plant's generators. Residents in the Orange County beach towns for years have lived with the twin-domed nuclear plant as a backdrop. In San Clemente, which falls within the plant's 10-mile evacuation zone, city-issued potassium iodide tablets and siren drills have become a fact of life.
         But with scenes of the nuclear disaster in Japan fresh in people's minds and radiation levels many times what people were told by officials continuing still, the recent closure has raised consciousness about nuclear issues and prompted critics to double down on their disapproval. Many city officials are now calling for the decommissioning of the San Onofre site. The plant's just renewed license is set to expire in 2022. Another ‘thank you’ to man of ‘change’ aka Bush Lite.
         "The plant should be shut down, period," said Verna Rollinger, mayor pro tem in Laguna Beach. "I have never supported it, and I wish nuclear energy was safe because it's a relatively clean energy source, but it's also so dangerous that I don't think we should be counting on that for our future energy needs." She added: "I think people are concerned, and for good reason."
         The mayor of San Clemente, Lori Donchak, wrote to federal officials asking that they demand a permanent disposal place for spent nuclear fuel that accrues at 600lbs a day under regular operation, and others have asked that they consider expanding the evacuation zone beyond the current 10-mile radius [to include Temecula, Murrieta, and Menifee]. At press time it remains unknown if anyone else in the valley, city officials and the Save Our Southwest Hills, are even remotely alerted or aware of the danger. If they are, it isn’t noticeable.
         Federal regulatory officials said the facility remains safe and the process to repair the damaged tubes is part of the effort to ensure those living nearby aren't endangered. Given the lies and cover-up attached to the Fukushima incident by their regulatory officials and that people with kids are encouraged not to leave the area, I don’t get a ‘warm and fuzzy’ from that federal assurance. That’s especially true when the plant in operation turns a million dollars a day in profit to its operators. Or put another way, would you stop your aids-infected hooker from 'tricking' if she was bringing you in a Mil a day?
         Now with that facility off-line for some time but with power still flowing to homes and businesses without interruption, some have asked why it needs to come back into service. "The question is," Rollinger said, "how difficult would it be to go without it?"
         But ‘the Man’ always has an answer if you are stupid enough to ask a question. Southern California Edison, which operates the San Onofre facility, said San Onofre is vital to providing electricity to a densely populated, high-consuming area like Southern California, with 20% of the region's electricity coming from nuclear plants.
         "San Onofre is critical to that grid stability," said Jennifer Manfrey, a company spokeswoman, who added that the company is ‘making up for the difference by purchasing power from different sources on the market -- a solution that can't continue indefinitely, particularly with the increase in consumption in the summer months. Other clean energy sources, such as wind and solar, aren't enough to close the gap’.
         But Marion Pack, a political organizer who opposes the facility, said the price for that energy source remains too high. "When you have to have all these safety measures," she said, "it says to me there is an inherent danger (to nuclear energy production)."
(All emphasis-Ed; this report was edited for content – Ed, please visit KTLA website for original wording)

No comments:

Post a Comment