ML24313A047
| ML24313A047 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/2024 |
| From: | Gorania A - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Office of Administration |
| References | |
| NRC-2023-0192, 89FR87433 00002 | |
| Download: ML24313A047 (1) | |
Text
PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 11/8/24, 9:25 AM Received: November 02, 2024 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. m30-28n1-jx39 Comments Due: December 16, 2024 Submission Type: API Docket: NRC-2023-0192 Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Comment On: NRC-2023-0192-0013 Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2; Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Document: NRC-2023-0192-DRAFT-0011 Comment on FR Doc # 2024-25444 Submitter Information Name: Anil Gorania Address:
Sherwood, OR, 97140 Email:neil.gorania@myaccess.ca Phone:4323491562 General Comment Germaines foray into renewables only like wind and solar, has failed miserably. They turned their nuclear plants off. Shortages necessitated new coal, creating the dirtiest grid in Europe.
They bought energy from Frances Nuclear excess.
Renewables have a place. But certainly not as reliable always on baseload power. That carbon-free necessity must be nuclear.
Soon the world, the US and California will be building new nuclear, both big and small.
It only makes sense to extend Diablo.
Financial and ethical.
If we invented nuclear today wed be scrambling to build 10 Diablo Canyons for California right away.
Screaming our energy and climate problems are solved.
Physics and math do not lie.
The lowest, cheapest Energy Return On Investment is nuclear, by most relevant metrics it supersedes.
In combination there is only one clear choice.
11/8/24, 9:26 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/12faccf2-399e-4396-b00d-b63984800674 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/12faccf2-399e-4396-b00d-b63984800674 1/2 SUNSI Review Complete Template=ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD: Kim Conway, Antoinette Walker-Smith, Mary Neely Comment (2)
Publication Date:
11/1/2024 Citation: 89 FR 87433
Depreciating nuclear over 20 or 40 years mars most metrics used to compare solar and wind. Because nuclear lasts as long as you want it to, endlessly refurbish-able. 100 years +
The payback is much much larger than the metrics allow unless you compare solar wind and the others to 100+ year lifespans.
Pro nuclear in every way.
I dedicated my life to being green for my kids futures. To erase the damage of our past.
I sadly realized supporting solar and wind so mindlessly, didnt help the way I thought it did.
4 years now, my mind has been changed by data.
Nuclear will save us. In every way.
11/8/24, 9:26 AM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/12faccf2-399e-4396-b00d-b63984800674 blob:https://www.fdms.gov/12faccf2-399e-4396-b00d-b63984800674 2/2