Patrick Chappate, The International Herald Tribune

No Longer a Rational Option

A Nuclear Plant on the Ring of Fire

Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

Californians have long anticipated and prepared for “the big one,” a mega-thrust earthquake that could strike the west coast at any time. Because our lovely coastline is located within the Pacific “ring of fire” earthquake zone, we live with the possibility that a major earth-shaking event could disrupt our lives at any time. We also remain exposed to a greater disaster than nature is likely to provide. What would happen if “the big one’ caused the release of large amounts of radioactive materials from PG&E’s Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant?

To the east of Diablo Canyon, in the direction of the prevailing wind, lies the San Joaquin Valley, California’s breadbasket. Over 25% of the food that passes across America’s dinner tables comes from the central, growing valley. If, somehow, whether caused by nature or accident, Diablo Canyon were to lose containment, we would be rendered helpless as large radioactive clouds rose into the sky. Sea-breezes would carry these toxic plumes eastward into the Valley. No one is going to want to buy produce that’s been contaminated with radioactive cesium, strontium, and iodine. With drought and heat waves destroying much of America’s 2012 corn crop, can we afford to lose California’s agricultural jewel to a nuclear accident?

Additionally, the drinking water for millions of men, women, and children flows from the Sierra Mountains through the Central Valley and into cities that stretch from the Bay Area to Southern California. Nobody is going to knowingly drink water that’s been laced with radioactive isotopes.

This double disaster would disrupt our infrastructure. After the multiple-meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, the release of toxic radioactive elements into the environment required far more relief-work than the natural disaster that caused the event. A nuclear meltdown at Diablo Canyon would overshadow all other emergency relief efforts in the state, slowing the repair of our damaged infrastructure while putting first-responders and the public in harm’s way. A major release of radioactive materials could disrupt all north-south traffic.

Why must we continue to live with this unnecessary danger?

PG&E has continuously underestimated the challenge of building a nuclear plant within California’s portion of the ring of fire. There are over 247 identified fault systems in California – but the truth is that there are just too many to count. In addition to major faults, there are the thousands of undiscovered collaterals. Collaterals are faults that branch off of major fault lines. Two recent devastating earthquakes in California, the 1987 Whittier earthquake and the 1994 Northridge earthquake, occurred along fault lines that were previously unknown.

Around and under Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, there is a confluence of 13 known fault systems. The east-west trending Diablo Cove Fault runs directly under Unit 1’s reactor. It projects offshore and intersects with the seismically active Shoreline Fault. The Shoreline Fault, less than a mile from the plant, was discovered in 2008. The Shoreline fault may be connected to the Hosgri Fault or other faults to its east. The Hosgri Fault, located just 2.5 miles offshore, is a right-lateral strand of the San Andreas Fault system. The tremendous earth-shaking power of the Hosgri Fault could be triggered by a rupture beginning on the Shoreline Fault Line.

The power stored in this combined network of fault systems can create an earthquake sufficient to exceed Diablo Canyon’s safeguards. The plant was originally designed to withstand a magnitude 6.75 earthquake but was later upgraded to survive a magnitude 7.5 quake.

On Saturday, October 27, 2012, a magnitude 7.7 earthquake struck off the west coast of British Columbia. It was Canada’s largest earthquake in over six decades. On Friday, January 4, 2013, a magnitude 7.5 quake hit Juneau Alaska. Both quakes were located within the Pacific ring of fire.

The Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant sits in front of the Monterey Shale. The shale spans Monterey, San Benito, and Fresno Counties. Ongoing efforts to hydraulically fracture, or frack, the Monterey Shale for petroleum and methane will increase the potential of a nuclear disaster. The highly pressurized toxic liquids used in fracking can start earthquakes by lubricating pre-existing faults that are located deep underground. This allows masses of rock to slide past each other. Both the U.S. Army and the U.S. Geological Survey have concluded that the practice of injecting pressurized water into deep rock formations causes earthquakes. Fracking the Monterey Shale could trigger a nuclear meltdown!

As the earth’s polar caps and glaciers melt at an ever-accelerating rate (2011 was the hottest year on record), the reduced weight on both the top and bottom of our planet is causing the earth’s tectonic plates to shift. This increased movement is responsible for larger and more frequent earthquakes.

Diablo Canyon’s containment and cooling systems may be more vulnerable to damage than its designers originally imagined. The plant’s two high-pressure vessels are made of thick steel and operate at about 1000 pounds per square inch (psi). Unfortunately, due to neutron radiation, these metal vessels tend to become brittle and lose their ability to deform under stress. They can become as fragile as glass from the temperature differential of the cooling water that erupts in the event of an emergency. The idea that nuclear power plants are durable enough to withstand earthquakes and other external shocks is a total myth.

Diablo Canyon is vulnerable to tsunamis. The plant sits perched on a bluff that’s 85 feet above sea level and, according to Pacific Gas & Electric, its tsunami wall is robust, with the plant expected to survive a wave up to 25 feet in height. Japanese authorities made similar claims before the wall that protected the Fukushima plant fell. Like the earthquake hazard, the tsunami threat is underestimated. In 1812, the Santa Barbara Channel earthquake produced five tsunami waves in front of the Santa Barbara Presidio. The USGS estimated the largest wave was about 50 feet high.

In 1878, a tsunami at Morro Bay destroyed both Avila and Point Sal piers, and in 1913, a tsunami wrecked the Monterey area. Nearby, at Seaside, immense domes of water appeared to observers to be higher than the highest sand hills along the shore. (The current quad sheet shows elevations as high as 120 feet.)

Over its lifetime, Diablo Canyon’s powerful “once-through seawater-intake cooling system” has killed billions of aquatic eggs, larvae, and juvenile fish. They are drawn through the intake screens and cooked to death or crushed by the system’s circulation pumps. Marine mammals, birds, adult fish, and crabs who can’t escape the suction are pinned to the screens and either suffocate or drown. (So much death and destruction just to boil water!)

From time to time, Diablo Canyon has been forced to go off-line because the screens were clogged with jellyfish and other sea creatures. In October 2008, nearly 1,000 jellyfish floated into the plant’s cooling intake cove, closing one reactor and reducing the other to half power. Again, in April 2012, an overwhelming number of jellyfish-like creatures called salps clogged the intake screens, forcing operators to shut the plant’s Unit 2 reactor. Similar jellyfish invasions have shut down nuclear power plants in several countries.

Nuclear plants like Diablo Canyon continue to be major contributors to global warming. It’s not just the tremendous amount of CO2 that’s released into our atmosphere from the mining, refining, transportation, and guarding of nuclear facilities and their radioactive waste. The greater problem is that these plants are heating up of our world’s rivers, lakes and oceans. Diablo Canyon’s once-through system alone uses about 87,700 gallons of seawater a minute or about 2.5 billion gallons a day. The seawater is then returned to the Pacific Ocean at temperatures 20 to 25 degrees hotter then the surrounding environment.

With thousands of “once through” coal-fired, oil-fired, natural gas, and nuclear power plants around the world contributing to rising ocean temperatures, it’s time for California to aggressively turn toward a future powered by clean energy technologies.

It is not necessary for us to face the frightening prospect of a double-disaster. It is no longer rational for us to live with the risks posed by the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. We need to begin planning the removal of this hazard from our coastline.

Harvey Sherback is a regular contributor to the Berkeley Daily Planet.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Suggestion: A contest to suggest a worse location for a nuclear power plant.
Unfortunately, arguments against building nuclear power plants on faults in earthquake-prone CA are also relevant to bullet trains.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
January 22, 2013 at 8:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

But 1000MW is difficult to replace and there's a hydroelectric dam in Ghana, Africa that might be a more likely candidate for imminent catastrophe as there are some signs it might collapse which, ironically, might be a good thing since the stagnant pond created behind the dam has become a major source of malaria and other insect-borne diseases but the sudden loss of 1000MW and the inhabitants of Sao Paulo, Ghana would be very bad.

Please be reminded that my settlement proposal to UCSB mafia of $60 million for illegally defaming, sabotaging and attempting to murder me has been set so that sufficient funds are available for three excellent and exciting engineering projects.
RTSC prospectors for optimizing the speed and probability of identifying a room temperature superconductor,
plasma lift feasibility studies to hopefully precede advanced dirigible designs
and design of a prototype floating open-cycle OTEC plant that can provide 100MW of solar electricity 24/7. Of all electricity-generating schemes conceived, OTEC is the most optimal in its balance of modest environmental pollution with high quality of electricity generated. They also hold promise of being extremely cheap to manufacture with straight-down cold water pipe extrusions and having efficiencies boosted with engineered solar preheating of intake seawater. Strangely, hardly anyone is working on OTEC and those that do exhibit lack of enthusiasm.

Rather than immediately dismantling powerplants we still need, we should aggressively pursue substitutes for 1000 MW powerplants like Diablo Canyon and the Akosombo Dam in Ghana. UCSB Mafia should pay me so we can move fast. With resources, I could have automated RTSC prospectors on line, plasma balloon experiments completed and an OTEC prototype design and fabrication procedure available within the year.

WooWoo (anonymous profile)
January 27, 2013 at 6:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The good news is California has over a 40% surplus of power WITHOUT either California nuclear plant, so we don't need to live with these devastating risks. See chart with Public Utilities Commission data at

It's time for the Governor and California legislators to do their job to keep Californians safe from a nuclear disaster. Both Diablo Canyon and San Onofre nuclear power plants are in the ring of fire and neither one is designed to handle current know earthquake risks. Both plants are out of compliance with the state and federal once-through cooling ban, yet California regulators continues to give the nuclear plants years to even submit a plan. The cost to retrofit for once-through cooling is so expensive (if even feasible), it would not be worth the money to ratepayers to keep these plants open. We could be the next Fukushima if our California political "leaders" don't act now. What are they waiting for? They have the authority through the CPUC and the Water Resources Control Board to shut these plants down now. A radiation meltdown at either plant will mean leaving your homes forever and will wreck the state and national economy. For more information, go to and

In addition, the San Onofre nuclear plant already leaked radiation last year due to severely defective steam generators. Southern California Edison wants to restart the plant without fixing this equipment. San Onofre also has the highest rate of safety complaints in the nation and the highest rate of retaliation against employees who report safety problems.

40% of our nation's cargo imports (and 30% of the exports) come through California's ports. Why are we risking the world economy and our food supply for nuclear reactors we don't need?

DonnaGilmore (anonymous profile)
January 27, 2013 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nuclear power is dangerous stuff but I think the biggest obstacle to nuclear power is long-term storage of nuclear waste which, like the feces flowing into Goleta Bay, most seem to ignore or want to ignore.

It's almost unbelievable, but a decision still needs to be made as to how we're going to store nuclear waste. It's disturbing that nuclear power will have provided no net energy when the costs of its long term storage for more than ten thousand years is factored in. But I think unknown surprises of the future may be more benevolent than malevolent as long as humans continue to dare to imagine and do the good.

I will get the serious program started to replace nuclear with multiple high MW open-cycle OTEC 24/7 solar plants when good Californians demand UCSB Mafia pay me the $100 million they owe me for attempting to murder me plus I receive the Presidency of the University of California that I would change to the University of New California as soon as I was installed into power by the righteous Citizens of California asserting their power over a reprobate treasonous board of mostly-zionist UC regents.

Compensated justly, I will also fund the project to automate Room Temperature Super Condcutor (RTSC) prospectors to optimize speed and probability of identifying applicable RTSC materials.
I will also fund the research to determine if plasma can be effectively used as a controllable medium of lift for advanced dirigible designs.

UCSB Mafia has an endowment of about $1 billion.
The hundred million dollars that UCSB mafia pays in civil restitution for crimes against me is only one-tenth of its one-billion dollar endowment and, ironically, it will be the best money they ever spent.

WooWoo (anonymous profile)
January 27, 2013 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ms. Gilmore, the chart posted regarding power output and consumption is definitely interesting, but what about going back just a few short years when our demand was exceeding production and the state was going through rolling brownouts?

Bajades (anonymous profile)
January 28, 2013 at 3:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sure its risky but if it gets shut down our electricity bills could go up by a few dollars each month. We can't have that can we?

Noletaman (anonymous profile)
January 28, 2013 at 10:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)


native2sb (anonymous profile)
January 29, 2013 at 2:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)


'Clean' coal --

"Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes — impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity."

From "Coal’s Assault on Human Health"

binky (anonymous profile)
January 29, 2013 at 9:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@Binky: Don't forget that wonderful disease Black Lung.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
January 30, 2013 at 4:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OTEC is the judgment of a former Navy Nuc Machinist Mate who grew up in an engineroom aboard an aircraft carrier, trained for awhile on the largest boiling water reactor plant in the United States while it was still relatively cool and has the Materials Engineering background to understand that OTEC design is best performed from the persepective of imaginative Materials Engineers. Open cycle is the way to go. Plants must be floating. Everything is lowered, never raised except to unsubmerge after assembly. Also, with so much pumping happening, a few pumps should be dedicated to transform the surface structure of the plant into the ultimate water park and architectural fountain. With the help of two Materials Engineer, two MEs, two EEs and two dedicated CADers, plans for the UC plant could be available within the year.

Wouldn't it be great to be able to coincide OTEC development with discovery of a workhorse room temperature superconductor? It would allow us to put the powerplants at floating positions of maximum solar illumination along the equator and transmit power cheaply and abundantly anywhere further south or north where it was needed. RTSC prospectors are imperative as are the experiments to determine feasibility of plasma dirigibles.

We need to be global.
We need to metaphorically conquer but conquer with love.
I expect compensation of $100million from UCSB Mafia and the dismissal of the UC Regents by special legislation of the California Assembly and Governor along with my installation as UC President given unprecedented power to fix UC and, consequently, California and the world.
We fight til death. With a DNA computer we may fight beyond death.

WooWoo (anonymous profile)
January 30, 2013 at 7:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I need to hear from Governor Brown by March 1st or California won't have much to do with much of anything happening that's all that good. California could become a sink of mediocrity but I seriously doubt it. I expect the call.

WooWoo (anonymous profile)
January 30, 2013 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

WooWoo, good luck on your project.
There's also 3rd generation nuclear plants with passive safety and 4th generation small reactors that burn their waste. However, the popular judgements on (fear of) nuclear power are based on the old reactors from the 1970's. These should probably be replaced with the new ones but that would be too expensive. Coal and gas are cheap and radiation is scary.
The whole problem could be solved with money, but the country is broke because we just gave about $5 trillion dollars to banks to cover their toxic debt.
Personally, I'm making the best of the warmer weather.

native2sb (anonymous profile)
January 30, 2013 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I like the future technology approach that replaces roof shingles with solar panels that all feed into the grid with decentralized storage systems. One system lets the power companies lease and maintain your roofs.

Also in a cash poor, water short state such as California, I never understood why the Central Valley's concrete lined aqueduct system is open. Why not lease the thousands of acres of aqueduct to be covered with solar panels? This will reduce water evaporation AND generate revenue for the state.

passagerider (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2013 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: