skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Forgotten lessons from Fukushima? ‘Utility minimizes earthquake risks at California nuclear plant,’ critics say

Since the Diablo Canyon nuclear power
plant opened on a rocky stretch of California coast in 1985, researchers
have discovered three nearby fault lines.
April 2015 – DIABLO CANYON, CALF. – Since
the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant opened on a rocky stretch of
California coast in 1985, researchers have discovered three nearby fault
lines capable of stronger quakes than the one that struck Napa last
year. And yet the plant’s owner, Pacific Gas and Electric Co., insists
that Diablo isn’t in greater danger than previously thought. If
anything, it’s in less. PG&E has, at several times in Diablo’s
complicated history, changed the way the company assesses the amount of
shaking nearby faults can produce, as well as the plant’s ability to
survive big quakes. To Diablo’s critics, PG&E keeps tweaking the
math to make California’s last nuclear plant look safer than it really
is. If PG&E’s seismic studies showed that nearby faults could
produce more shaking than the plant was designed to handle, Diablo could
be forced to close. “The company has been claiming that the plant is
stronger and stronger as more faults have been discovered,” said former
state Sen. Sam Blakeslee, who has a doctorate in geophysics and lives
nearby. “The utility has been moving the goal posts.”
PG&E insists that years of seismic
studies at the plant near San Luis Obispo have given the company a more
accurate picture than before. The biggest neighboring fault line — the
Hosgri, discovered 3 miles offshore while Diablo was under construction —
can’t shake the plant nearly as much as initially thought, according to
PG&E. And the methods PG&E has developed to assess seismic
threats at Diablo are far more precise than the ones used when the plant
was designed, the company says. “It is a gold standard of how to look
at seismicity and the geology surrounding any infrastructure, not just
nuclear power plants,” said Ed Halpin, PG&E senior vice president
and chief nuclear officer. “In my opinion it should be held up and
applauded.” Instead, PG&E’s methodology has ended up in court.
Environmentalists pushing to close Diablo filed a lawsuit last year
claiming the the Nuclear Regulatory Commission — the federal agency
overseeing the nation’s nuclear plants — illegally let PG&E amend
the seismic safety portion of Diablo’s operating license without public
hearings.
The suit came after one of the
commission’s former inspectors at Diablo argued that the plant was no
longer operating within the terms of its license and should be shut
down. His objections, and the commission’s handling of them, are now
under investigation by the commission’s own internal watchdog office.
When construction on the plant began, in 1968, PG&E considered the
location free of active faults. But in 1971, geologists working for
Shell Oil found the Hosgri just offshore. For a power plant, the most
important gauge of an earthquake’s severity isn’t the magnitude — it’s
the amount of ground motion an earthquake will create at the plant
itself. Diablo had originally been designed to withstand a specific
level of shaking — .4g, or .4 times the force of gravity. An earthquake
on the Hosgri Fault, researchers decided, could produce more violent
shaking than that, with a peak ground motion of .75g. By then, much of
the plant had already been built. So PG&E had to retrofit Diablo
before it ever opened. –Emergency Management
0 comments:
Post a Comment