power plants

by

US finalizes $1.1 billion in credits for California nuclear plant

Reuters (January 18, 2024) US finalizes $1.1 billion in credits for California nuclear plant 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-finalizes-11-billion-credits-california-nuclear-plant-2024-01-17/

 

The Biden administration has approved $1.1 billion in credits to keep California’s Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant running. This funding is part of a $6 billion program created by the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law to help existing nuclear plants stay open. The government believes these plants are crucial for fighting climate change and reaching a goal of 100% clean electricity by 2035. Diablo Canyon was supposed to shut down by 2025, but with this financial support, it will continue to operate instead.

 

As this article notes “The U.S. nuclear power industry does not have a permanent place to put toxic, radioactive waste, a problem its critics say should be fixed before extending the life of reactors. Critics also say nuclear is too expensive to make a dent in fighting climate change.” which i agree with. Instead of immediately beginning to shut down nuclear power plants, we need to figure out a way to sustainably do it. Nuclear waste is dangerous to both humans and the enviornment which is one of the flaws refegarding nuclear energy as the waste it produces takes a long time to decompose, as the half-lives of radio active isotopes are very long, some taking millions of years. Additionally, the fact that we don’t have a permanent solution for storing nuclear waste is really concerning. If we keep relying on nuclear power without figuring out how to deal with this waste safely, we’re just creating a bigger problem for the future. 

by

California legislators break with Gov. Newsom over loan to keep state’s last nuclear plant running

AP News (June 13, 2024) California legislators break with Gov. Newsom over loan to keep state’s last nuclear plant running

https://apnews.com/article/diablo-canyon-nuclear-newsom-reactors-california-45f15ac6e3a39f4fe7bbd05a9fd30d8b

 

The California Legislature wants to cancles a $400 million loan payment, that was supposed to be used to extent the lifespan of californias last nuclear powerplant. Governor Gavin Newsom argues that keeping the plant running will maintain energy reliability during climate change. The Legislatures vote adds closure to the ongoing negotiations, but also highlights the costs that comes with keeping the plant in operation. Environmentalist estimated that $12 billion dollars would need to be spent in order to extend the plants operations, raising concerns about higher fees for ratepayers, and safety concerns regarding nearby earthquake faults. 

 

This article shines a light on the difficulties with balancing energy needs with environmental risks and concerns, both of which are topics within environmental science. I think that keeping the plant running for longer would be the better option, as the article states that removing the plant could leave dangerously radioactive materials in the area, which would mean it would be pointless to move to another location and leave a hazard behind. Closing the plant would also raise ratepayers fees, and has doubled in cost to earlier projections. These economic facts make closing the plant a struggle as it does more harm than good. While tying in both aspects, environment and economics, it is clear that keeping the Diablo Canyon Power Plant open is the best route for California residents.

by

California’s Diablo Canyon Plant Shows Nuclear Power’s Aging Problem

Forbes (April 29, 2024) California’s Diablo Canyon Plant Shows Nuclear Power’s Aging Problem https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesbroughel/2024/04/29/californias-diablo-canyon-plant-demonstrates-nuclear-powers-aging-problem/

 

The Diablo Canyon Power Plant, one of Californias largest power plants that provides about 9% of Californias power, was initially planned to be closed by 2024 and 2025, but was kept open when California lawmakers passed a legislation keeping the plant open until 2030. The decision was made from economic and environmental challenges that have been associated with the retiring of other plants. On the otherrhand, environmental groups are suing Diablo canyon to close immediately due to the environmental risks that are produced from the plant. Overall, the nuclear industry needs to reassess their regualtions of risk. 

 

This article highlights the challenges surrounding nuclear power plants, especially as they age, and the differing opinions on how to manage the future of the plant. It’s directly related to environmental science because it deals with the environmental risks and the benefits of keeping an old nuclear power plant running versus shutting it down. In my opinion, while it’s crucial to consider the environmental risks, we also need to think about the potential impact of closing the plant, including the high costs and carbon emissions involved in building a new nuclear plant. Understanding both sides is key to making informed decisions about our energy future.

by

California’s Only Nuclear Power Plant Gets State Approval For 5-Year Extension

Reuters. (2023 December 15). California’s Only Nuclear Power Plant Gets State Approval For 5-Year Extension. Retrieved January 28th, 2024, from https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/californias-only-nuclear-plant-gets-state-approval-5-year-extension-2023-12-15/ 

The California Public Utilities Commission granted a 5-year extension for Electric’s Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant and Pacific Gas. This was done in order to reduce electricity shortages during extreme weather. So this means that the plant can continue working until 2029-2030. Some people are concerned about the plant being prone to earthquakes and the plant’s lack of disposal of radioactive waste. The Biden Administration also gave funding to prevent the closure of Diablo Canyon in climate change efforts.

 

I believe that relying on nuclear energy in an effort to fight climate change is definitely good, but it has its risks as I read in the article. I also believe that renewable energy sources and energy-efficient measures should be put first instead. This article relates to environmental science as it discusses power plants, climate change, and energy sources. 

by

Southern California’s Natural Gas Plants To Stay Open Through 2026.

Cal Matters. (2023, August 15). Southern California’s Natural Gas Plants To Stay Open Through 2026. Retrieved January 28th, 2024, from https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/08/southern-california-natural-gas-plants-remain-open/ 

In an effort to reduce blackouts and stabilize California’s power grid, the state has voted to extend operations on 3 natural gas plants. This decision goes against California’s goal of achieving 100% renewable and zero-carbon electricity by 2045. The decision, made by the State Water Resources Control Board, has received a lot of outrage and controversy from local communities and environmentalists. The people are mad about the plant’s impact on the emissions, pollution, and harm to marine life.

The article is related to environmental science as it shows the continuous debate and tension between the need for stable power and the negative impacts on the environment. I think that putting short-term grid stability over long-term sustainability just goes against our efforts to stop climate change and switch to clean energy. I read that they may push for a faster transition to renewable energy and the use of energy storage devices to reduce the demand for fossil fuel facilities. But i still think its just fully against everything we have been pushing for.

by

Nuclear power gets another look in ‘all-of-the-above’ energy approach as climate worries mount

Singer, S. (2023, June 20). Nuclear power gets another look in ‘all-of-the-above’ energy approach as climate worries mount. Utility Dive. https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuclear-power-smr-climate-ira-omnibus-spending/639484/

Nuclear energy is increasing and also look by federal and state officials are to cut greenhouse gas emissions and bolster energy security. The International Atomic Energy Agency expects global nuclear capacity to be more than double 873 electrical GW net by 2050 and it would be more than 81 GW. The Inflation Reduction Act which communist about 369 billion for climate efforts, includes a zero-emission nuclear power production credit and it’s going to produce up to $15 an MWh of electricity produced.

 

What sparked me to get interested in this article is the number of greenhouse gases that are going to affect nuclear power plants. Also The Inflation Reduction Act is trying their best to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with the amount of money they are putting in to pay for the zero-emission nuclear power production credit

by

Is nuclear energy critical in solving climate change?

Georges, G. (2023, February 9). Is nuclear energy critical in solving climate change? CAS. https://www.cas.org/resources/cas-insights/sustainability/nuclear-energy-critical-solving-climate-change

In the graph shows the zero emission blueprint that approximately 450 nuclear power plants operate today at full capacity at 90% of the time compared to the coal and solar plants which is 50% and 25%, and only 10% of the total electricity demand world wide supplied by nuclear power plants. With that nuclear energy carries a controversial image due to the risk of radioactivity and its impact on the environment. 

What I learned from the article is the amount of nuclear energy used and also the risk to the environment that it will lead to. Another thing is that power plants is a causing the environment to have climate change due to CO2 emissions going higher. I also learned that they are about 450 power plants that are used at full capacity than the coal and solar plants in this world.  

Nuclear power in the world today. (2023, May). World Nuclear Association.

by

Nuclear Energy

Costa, H. (2023, March 2). Nuclear energy. National Geographic. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/nuclear-energy/

Nuclear energy can be use to create electricity, but it must release an atom first once. During the process that is called nuclear fission, atoms are split to release the nuclear energy. Nuclear reactors and power plants are machines that can control the nuclear fission to produce electricity. The type of fule that the reactor uses is the elements is uranium 

 

What I learned about this article was what nuclear power is and how it works. Also the amount of power plants our country has. The article also talks about how nuclear energy is powered and what is in the energy. 

Georges, G. (2023, February 9). Is nuclear energy critical in solving climate change? CA

by

The Future of Nuclear Power in a Low-Carbon World

Blatt, J. (2023, June 20). The future of nuclear power in a low-carbon world. National Academies. https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2023/06/the-future-of-nuclear-power-in-a-low-carbon-world

Our country has been using nuclear energy for electricity for a while now. But at the same time, building a nuclear power plant in a country is costly. But with the new generation, \people are thinking of a smaller option of atomic energy that will be the same as a power plant that they do not need to spend much money on. 

 

This article gave me a spark that our country has been using nuclear energy for electricity, and with how expensive it is, they are trying to dfind an alternative. People who want to make nuclear power plants are finding ways for the construction to not be costly and for less work.

by

Biden rule tells power plants to cut climate pollution by 90 percent or shut down.

 

Politico. (May 11th, 2023). Biden rule tells power plants to cut climate pollution by 90 percent or shut down. Retrieved August 20th, 2023, from https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/11/biden-rule-tells-power-plants-cut-climate-pollution-00095827 

 

 Biden’s Campaign to green the economy is facing counterattacks from Republicans and coal-state senators. Biden is promoting electric cars, green energy sources, and tightening regulations on products. It is critical for Biden to get as many power companies on board with the rule. These companies would help shore up the rule politically. If Biden is re-elected then he and these rules will still have to face the judicial gauntlet, who already do not really like these issues and rules.

 

I don’t know that much about politics, and I’m not in the scoop. But it’s crazy to see fights over trying to make the world better again and trying to save it. I believe that the promotion of green energy forms is very good and smart. I see so many electric cars on the road nowadays. I would hope that the power companies would want to help the earth and get their name out there as companies. So they could get jobs and businesses running.