The Diablo's in the details

Is it necessary to keep a California nuke plant open to avoid a climate crisis?

… but first …

Twin Angels, a Chacoan outlier, with oil and gas infrastructure in the background. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

The Biden administration plans a 20 year ban on federal oil and gas leasing within 10 miles of northern New Mexico’s Chaco Culture National Historical Park. It’s yet another sign that Biden is beginning to deliver on his beginning-of-term promises regarding climate change and oil and gas development. He announced the mineral withdrawal as part of a larger initiative to build “a new era of nation-to-nation engagement,” tribal nation that is. The Land Desk applauds the action—as a first step. More is needed to protect the Greater Chaco Landscape. For context:

News Roundup: Chaco buffer zone inadequate

---

THE NEWS: An assessment by Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University researchers concludes that keeping Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant near San Luis Obispo, California, open for 20 years past its 2025 slated closure date would: reduce California carbon emissions by 10 percent; lessen dependence on natural gas; save $21 billion; and spare 90,000 acres of land from renewable energy development.

Will climate change and the threat of power outages spur environmentalists to reconsider keeping existing nuclear plants running?

THE CONTEXT: In 2018 California regulators signed off on a Pacific Gas & Electric plan to shut down Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant after 40 years of operation because it was no longer cost-effective and bringing its cooling system into compliance with state law would be pricey. Anti-nuclear groups also had safety concerns, since the plant sits near more than one seismic fault line.