When California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently issued an eleventh-hour proposal to extend the life of the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant through 2035, he did so despite years of intense opposition from environmental groups, anti-nuclear advocates, and even fellow Democrats — some of whom blasted the move as an “outrage.”
In fairness, the mid-August proposed extension of the coastal central California facility did represent a partial about-face from Newsom, who as lieutenant governor had thrown his weight behind the push to close California’s last remaining nuclear plant, an effort that first gained traction in 2016 and was unilaterally approved by state regulators just two years later.
But in urging the temporary extension, Newsom is acknowledging the harsh new realities of a changing climate landscape. It’s one befallen by high-heat conditions, wildfires, and extreme drought that have strained the state’s electric grid.
Neither is Newsom alone in this respect: As extreme weather conditions caused by climate change continue to play out faster and more intensely than predicted, leaders around the world have been forced to make a series of once-unthinkable decisions. That includes pitting grid reliability against renewables. Or in this case, nuclear plants against the risk of rolling blackouts.
Germany, for its part, recently indicated it may postpone the closure of its three remaining nuclear plants, in what would be a political U-turn that comes as it braces to secure alternative supplies ahead of a feared Russian gas cutoff this winter.
And for Newsom, keeping Diablo operational through 2035 could be a crucial step toward keeping the lights on in the state.
A recent study published by the Brattle Group found that by extending Diablo’s capacity, California could decarbonize “more quickly, more reliably, and at a lower cost” — approximately $5 billion less, in fact — than if the plant shut down as planned in 2025.
Others have noted the inherent risks of taking a major nuclear plant offline at a time when California is already grappling with the prospect of supply outages and rolling blackouts.
Diablo, on the coast in San Luis Obispo County, is a major source of power in California, supplying roughly 17% of the state’s greenhouse-gas-free electricity supply and 8.6% of its total electricity.
Researchers have noted that while bringing renewables online as a replacement for nuclear power is an option, it takes years to develop; and in the short-to-medium term, fossil fuels are often used as a stopgap.
If Diablo’s closure goes forward in 2025 as previously anticipated, “that would probably increase the likelihood of relying on fossil fuel plants,” Andrew Campbell, the executive director of the Berkeley Haas Energy Institute, told the Washington Examiner in an interview.
Others pointed to California’s failures in its abrupt decision to shutter the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, or SONGS, in 2012. A 2016 study published in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics found that in the 12-month period after the Southern California facility was shuttered, its spare capacity was replaced by natural gas, which drove up costs for consumers by an estimated $350 million that year alone.
In addition, researchers found that additional carbon emissions rose by 9 million metric tons in the 12 months following the plant’s closure — the equivalent of putting an additional 2 million gas-consuming cars on the road.
Newsom’s office, for its part, has described the proposal to keep Diablo online as a limited-term bid to help ensure grid reliability for California.
Diablo “continues to be an important resource as we transition away from fossil fuel generation to greater amounts of clean energy, with the goal of achieving 100% clean electric retail sales by 2045,” the governor’s office told the Washington Examiner in a statement.
And while momentum appears to be growing to keep Diablo open, it’s not final.
The effort must first be cleared by state lawmakers, as well as California’s Department of Water Resources, which would also be tasked with signing off on a $1.4 billion loan request for the plant’s owner, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., or PG&E.
Passing the bill will also require state lawmakers to act quickly, as both chambers must clear the legislation by Aug. 31.
Asked about the effort to keep Diablo online, a spokesperson for PG&E told the Washington Examiner that the utility is “committed to California’s clean energy future, and as a regulated utility, we are required to follow the energy policies of the state.”
We “stand ready to support should there be a change in state policy, to help ensure grid reliability for our customers and all Californians at the lowest possible cost,” the spokesperson added.
