ML24346A009
| ML24346A009 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 12/10/2024 |
| From: | Public Commenter Public Commenter |
| To: | NRC/NMSS/DREFS |
| NRC/NMSS/DREFS | |
| References | |
| 89FR87433 | |
| Download: ML24346A009 (2) | |
Text
From:
Dale Pfremmer <pfremmer@earthlink.net>
Sent:
Tuesday, December 10, 2024 9:49 PM To:
DiabloCanyonEnvironmental.Resource
Subject:
[External_Sender] Diablo Canyon Should Remain On-line Dear NRC Representative; I am a retired engineer. About 37 years of my career includes work on various nuclear systems both current and advanced.
I am concerned that the development of nuclear energy may be long-delayed before its necessity in abating the current release of carbon into the atmosphere is properly recognized. keeping existing nuclear plants operating is part of recognizing that need.
With regard to Diablo Canyon, the only nuclear plant still operating in California, the California Legislature has determined "renewable" energy can manage the electricity needs of California --
ignoring the many pitfalls of this assumption.
First, the unprecedented use of batteries for energy storage has proceeded without addressing the obvious availability-of-resources conflict with electric vehicle needs. In other words a key element of the envisioned system is not renewable. The cost, the safety, etc, also have yet to be resolved. These, on top of the fact that energy has to be stored daily, using much more solar and wind than we have now, and this is all dependent on the weather and the time of day. Definitely factors in grid stability management.
On the other hand, the many terawatt hours of dispatchable energy stored in the nuclear fuel of the two 1,100 megawatt nuclear reactors at Diablo Canyon provides electricity for more than a year without refueling -- with no carbon emissions, and a known recorded of electric power availability.
With regard to the now closed San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) and the spent fuel being stored there, I believe the term "nuclear waste" has incorrectly created a significant ant-nuclear sway in public thinking. Spent fuel is not nuclear waste -- unless it is allowed to become waste instead of becoming a valuable energy source in the continuing future of nuclear power. It seems to me that the NRC and the DOE, without over-stepping their combined mandate, could do more to correct that misconception.
I very much appreciate your taking the time to read my email, and to consider the thoughts it contains.
Sincerely, Dale Pfremmer Agura Hills, California
Federal Register Notice:
89FR87433 Comment Number:
36 Mail Envelope Properties (5ea5c108-1b1e-9131-3de2-367b181c3051)
Subject:
[External_Sender] Diablo Canyon Should Remain On-line Sent Date:
12/10/2024 9:49:18 PM Received Date:
12/10/2024 9:49:25 PM From:
Dale Pfremmer Created By:
pfremmer@earthlink.net Recipients:
"DiabloCanyonEnvironmental.Resource" <DiabloCanyonEnvironmental.Resource@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
earthlink.net Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2157 12/10/2024 9:49:25 PM Options Priority:
Normal Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date: