The latest King Tide makes it more imperative than ever.
It was a cold and stormy morning when I was asked by the Coalition for Nuclear Safety to meet with photographer, (@MarkMennie), at San Onofre to show him the effects of the King Tide on our nuclear power plant. We met at the dark and deserted surfing beach, making our way to the tsunami wall while the churning waves ate away at what little trail was left perched above the ominous ocean. We discovered a section had collapsed before we returned from the shoot, but by then the tide had begun to recede and we were able to make a run for it in the wet sand, with expensive camera equipment and all.
As it turned out, the photographer needed a person in the shots to give it scale, so I obliged. We were both drawn towards the action, getting closer and closer to the waves topping the shorter sea wall along the concrete pathway. We protected the gear as we approached, only to get soaked ourselves as the tide and swell reached their peak. Jack hammers were hammering as decommissioning started up for the day, and the sound of waves crashing made for what seemed like a dramatic confrontation between man and nature.
The tsunami wall has not aged well, and the elements have taken their toll. A pathetic patch job to repair the wall made me stop and think, is this anything like the patch job that Edison intends to employ when a crack develops in the 5/8-inch thin steel canisters, each holding more radioactive waste than was released in the Chernobyl accident?
The tsunami wall has not aged well, and the elements have taken their toll. A pathetic patch job to repair the wall made me stop and think, is this anything like the patch job that Edison intends to employ when a crack develops in the 5/8-inch thin steel canisters, each holding more radioactive waste than was released in the Chernobyl accident?
Tell California Coastal Commission: Re-evaluate sea level rise now, not 2035
This is truly a race against time, but many potential victims remain unaware of the threat. In approving the coastal permit, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) put in a condition that requires Edison to evaluate sea level rise in 2035. We are asking the CCC to take the initiative and request an analysis for conditions that may require moving Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) to higher ground. The time has come, sooner than expected and we can’t afford to wait for another decade or more to pass. The planning must begin now. You can help by signing our petition here, which is already well underway. We can’t wait until 2035 to re-evaluate sea level rise, as the permit currently is written.
Support state legislation that requires a new plan for storing nuclear waste at San Onofre
Please also sign our petition for urgent state legislation to give Californians more say over how nuclear waste is to be stored while it remains stranded here for a very uncertain number of decades. The canisters were only intended to last for twenty years in temporary storage until they could be shipped to Yucca Mountain, Nevada, which has been abandoned before completion due to water infiltration primarily.
Some canisters have already been in service for 17 years. Edison estimates thirty years is the most optimistic target to get it moved to a temporary site, which is being met with all kinds of resistance by those being put at great risk in places like Texas and New Mexico.
Your support will help us garner more co-sponsors for the bill being finalized now. I will share it with you as soon as it is available.