I enjoyed reading David Middlecamp’s article in the Tribune on Dec. 29 on the history of Diablo Canyon, and the reprinting of a Tribune piece from March 2, 1968, by Elliot Curry. Of the 202 people interviewed about the proposed nuclear power plant, only 7 percent were opposed to the project.
I’m wondering, in light of what is now known about nuclear energy, if a similar survey might show a different perspective on the public’s opinion. A larger and broader survey should be made.
The following are some still-unanswered questions after 44 years:
1) How to handle all of the spent, but still radioactive fuel rods? No acceptable answers are in sight.
2) How would the plant withstand an unexpectedly huge seismic movement and accompanying tsunami?
3) How much will it cost the ratepayers to reinforce this aging plant, that, in my opinion, should be decommissioned? The bigger question is whether anyone has really done a cost analysis on what this “cheap energy” has really cost the taxpayers over these 44 years of experimentation.
4) Why has the NRC and our own Board of Supervisors OK’d a totally unacceptable evacuation plan that looks very neat on paper, but is, in my opinion, absolutely absurd in reality? This plan would put thousands of people in total gridlock, stuck in their cars (east, north, and south) within 10 minutes of an alarm sounding.
5) The never-ending questions of ongoing damage to marine life.
6) Are we stuck with it, or is it time to get serious about renewables? Maybe this is where our tax subsidies should be spent.
Maybe you can think of some other questions that I’ve missed.