Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bananas

(27,509 posts)
Wed May 1, 2013, 04:48 PM May 2013

Calif. Reactors Might Be Retired If Restart Nixed

Source: Associated Press

Costs tied to the long-running shutdown of California's San Onofre nuclear power plant have soared to $553 million, while the majority owner raised the possibility Tuesday of retiring the plant if it can't get one reactor running later this year.

<snip>

SCE has asked federal regulators for permission to restart the Unit 2 reactor and run it at reduced power for a five-month test period, in hopes of stopping vibration blamed for tube damage. Without that approval, Chairman Ted Craver told Wall Street analysts in a conference call that a decision on whether to retire one or both reactors might be made this year.

Carver's disclosure highlighted the growing pressure and uncertainty the company faces as one of California's most important sources of electricity sits idle. When running, the plant's twin reactors can power 1.4 million homes.

<snip>

With questions about whether the plant can restart, mounting costs and who picks up the tab, "there is a practical limit to how much we can absorb of that risk," Craver said.

<snip>

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/costs-calif-nuke-shutdown-550-million-19078080

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Calif. Reactors Might Be Retired If Restart Nixed (Original Post) bananas May 2013 OP
UT has a poll on whether you think SONGS should be shut down. aggiesal May 2013 #1
Thanks, I voted. SunSeeker May 2013 #3
Thanks - I didn't even notice it. bananas May 2013 #5
How much solar/wind would $553 million buy? tinrobot May 2013 #2
It costs about . . . aggiesal May 2013 #4
Just checked - the price of solar is now around $1/watt tinrobot May 2013 #6
So it will cost $553 million to shut it down, what will it cost if we wait until it melts down? olddad56 May 2013 #7

SunSeeker

(51,559 posts)
3. Thanks, I voted.
Wed May 1, 2013, 06:37 PM
May 2013

The current tally:

Should Edison shut down San Onofre?
Yes 52% (536)
No 47% (488)

Total votes 1024

bananas

(27,509 posts)
5. Thanks - I didn't even notice it.
Wed May 1, 2013, 07:14 PM
May 2013

Should Edison shut down San Onofre?
Yes 52% (588)
No 47% (529)
Total votes 1117

aggiesal

(8,916 posts)
4. It costs about . . .
Wed May 1, 2013, 07:05 PM
May 2013

$1000 per Solar Panel when I purchased mine about 10 years ago.

I purchased 24 panels, and it produces 2.4 KWh with no loss
which is impractical. It usually generates about 1.8 - 2.0 KWh
on a really sunny day.

Place them in the Southwest, and no doubt, I think it would have
generated more then $550M over the last 16 months.

All new homes built in the Southwest, (Texas, New Mexico, Arizona
and So. Cal) should be mandated to have solar panels placed on
their roofs. Yes I said MANDATED.

tinrobot

(10,903 posts)
6. Just checked - the price of solar is now around $1/watt
Wed May 1, 2013, 07:53 PM
May 2013

So $553 million could buy appox. 553MW of solar panels. Approx 70-80% of that would be available as power.

The San Onofre reactors produce 1172MW and 1178MW for a total of 2.35 GW.

You'd need a heck of a lot more than $553m worth of solar to replace that power plant.

olddad56

(5,732 posts)
7. So it will cost $553 million to shut it down, what will it cost if we wait until it melts down?
Wed May 1, 2013, 08:00 PM
May 2013

just wondering.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Calif. Reactors Might Be ...