The Wall Street Journal covers the administration’s $80 billion plan to scale AP1000 reactors, but the real opportunity is bigger than one design as advanced nuclear now spans microreactors, modular systems, and gigawatt-scale plants, a range that can serve data centers, industrial loads, military sites, and utilities alike...
We are thrilled to share that Diablo Canyon has been saved—for now! Rather than allowing this clean energy producing power plant to be wastefully decommissioned by those who simply dislike nuclear power, the California legislature, under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom, voted to extend its life by up to 10 years. Senate Bill 846, sponsored by Jordan Cunningham (CA-25, R), passed with nearly unanimous votes in both the Democratically-controlled Assembly and Senate. SB 846 also provides for as much as $1.4 billion in loans from California to PG&E for re-licensing and enables PG&E to also submit a timely application to the DOE's Civil Nuclear Credit program for further aid in re-starting licensing with the NRC and transitioning back to full-operating mode. This is a nearly miraculous win for California's pronuclear advocates and it is worth celebrating both the win and the broader community that made it possible. Please read more at the link.
Published by Nucleation Capital in ADVOCACY ACTIONS, Climate change, Climate mayhem, Climate policy, Environmental support for nuclear, Government support, International support for nuclear, Investor activity, Philanthropic support for nuclear, Politicians supporting nuclear, Pro-nuclear campaign, Solving climate, US competitiveness, US technological leadership, Women in Nuclear
Diablo Canyon has been saved—for now! Rather than allowing this clean energy producing power plant to be wastefully decommissioned by those who simply dislike nuclear power, the California legislature, under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom, voted to extend its life by up to 10 years. Senate Bill 846, sponsored by Jordan Cunningham (CA-25, R), passed with nearly unanimous votes in both the Democratically-controlled Assembly and Senate. SB 846 also provides for as much as $1.4 billion in loans from California to PG&E for re-licensing and enables PG&E to also submit a timely application to the DOE's Civil Nuclear Credit program for further aid in re-starting licensing with the NRC and transitioning back to full-operating mode. This is a nearly miraculous win for California's pronuclear advocates and it is worth celebrating both the win and the broader community that made it possible.
While there are a lot of individuals and organizations who contributed to setting the stage for this phenomenal political win for nuclear power in general and Diablo Canyon specifically, there were also considerable underlying political realities that effectively forced the Governor's hand. In particular, the state's own energy experts from CALISO, CEC, as well as academia and industry, expressed extreme alarm at the high level of fragility of the grid and the high risk of power outages even with Diablo Canyon operating. The closure of Diablo Canyon was clearly going to exacerbate the already bad situation. Climate change and state clean energy mandates made the CPUC's plan to replace Diablo Canyon's clean energy with dirty coal power from PacifiCorp anathema to the both the state's goals and the Governor's political reputation. Meanwhile, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in dire energy shortages in Europe and rising gas prices. This is making the world's growing reliance on natural gas both uneconomical and politically unsavory.
With that as the political and economic backdrop, we wish to take a look at some of the individuals and groups that took on prominent roles advocating for nuclear power in general and for Diablo Canyon specifically. Some of these groups worked behind the scenes and some played highly prominent roles. The press has recognized the advocacy of the San Luis Obispo-based Mothers for Nuclear, which has consistently stood up for Diablo Canyon at local hearings, rallies and in the press. This mom-led non-profit further coordinated with Isabelle Boemeke, a model-turned "nuclear influencer," whose online presence "Isodope," introduced a witty, stylish and slightly snarky approach to pronuclear advocacy, sharing her frank messaging with a new generation. Together, they organized several recent and memorable public events, a rally on behalf of Diablo Canyon and the issuance of letter to Governor Newsom signed by 79 prominent scientific experts. As impactful as both of those campaigns were, their success rested upon a foundation of public opinion that had grown stronger due to very considerable contributions from the following very notable individuals and groups:
The Pronuclear Village
Nuclear-Focused Writers
James Conca, Forbes
Robert Bryce, Forbes and other
Michael Shellenberger, Forbes, Environmental Progress
Rod Adams, Atomic Insights
Catherine Clifford, CNBC
Academics & Scientists
Dr, James Hansen, Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions, at the Earth Institute of Columbia University
Dr. Todd Allen, University of Michigan
Dr. Jacopo Buongiorno, MIT
Dr. Steven Chu, Stanford University
Dr. Jesse Jenkins, Princeton
Dr. Jessica Lovering, University of Colorado, Boulder
Also, another 75 or so who signed the February 2022 letter to Governor Newsom
Non-Profits & Think Tanks
The Breakthrough Institute, Ted Nordhaus
Clean Air Task Force, Armond Cohen
Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Carl Wurtz, Dr. Gene Nelson
Anthropocene Institute, Carl Page
The Long Now, Stewart Brand
Energy for Humanity, Kirsty Gogan
Nuclear Innovation Alliance, Judi Greenwald
TerraPraxis, Erik Ingersoll, Kirsty Gogan
Good Energy Collective, Dr. Jessica Lovering, Suzy Hobbs Baker, Dr. Rachel Slaybaugh
Energy Impact Center, Bret Kugelmass
Energy for Humanity, Kirsty Gogan
Fastest Path to Zero, Dr. Todd Allen, at the University of Michigan
Climate Protection & Restoration Initiative, Dr. James Hansen, Donn J. Viviani and others
The Nature Conservancy, Mark Tercek
The World Resources Institute
Podcasters
Titans of Nuclear, Bret Kugelmass
The Atomic Show, Rod Adams
Decouple Podcast, Dr. Chris Keefer
Energy Impact Podcast, Bret Kugelmass
Climate Fix, Colby & Phil
Columbia Energy Exchange, Jason Bordoff, Bill Lovelass
Cowen’s Energy Transition Podcast, Marc Bianchi
Organizers & Advocates
Environmental Progress, Michael Shellenberger
Mothers for Nuclear, Heather Hoff and Kirstin Zaitz
Save Clean Energy, Isabelle Boemeke
Generation Atomic, Eric Meyers
Campaign for a Green Nuclear Deal, Madison Hilly
Stand Up for Nuclear, Paris Ortiz-Wines
Emergency Reactor, Zion Lights
Climate Coalition, Valerie Gardner, Gary Kahanak
Nuclear New York, Dr. Dietmar Detering, Isuru Seneviratne
US Nuclear Industry: NEI, ANS, USNIC, NIA, INPO, etc.
International: IPCC, WNA, IAEA, WNN, etc.
Artists & Authors
Robert Stone, Pandora’s Promise (documentary)
Dave Schumacher, The New Fire (documentary)
Robert Bryce, Juice (documentary) and author of "A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations"
Oliver Stone, Nuclear: Time to Look Again (a new documentary, being released now)
Joshua Goldstein, "A Bright Future: How Some Countries Have Solved Climate Change and the Rest Can Follow"
Meredith Angwin, “Shorting the Grid: The Hidden Fragility of our Electric Grid” and "Campaigning for Clean Air"
Dr. Robert Hargraves, author of "Thorium, Energy Cheaper than Coal"
Michael Bloomberg, co-author of "Climate of Hope"
Gwyneth Cravens, author of "Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy"
Mathijs Beckers, author of "Highway to Dystopia: About spaceship Earth, Climate Change and more"
Isabelle Boemeke, creator of the “Isodope” TicTok videos and tweets
Baba Brinkman, Nuclear/Science rapper
Influencers
Stewart Brand, The Whole Earth Catalog
Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Dr. Gene Nelson
What is Nuclear, Nick Touran
Radiant Energy, Mark Nelson
Thorium Energy Alliance, John Kutsch
Google, Ross Koningstein (IEEE, White Papers)
D.J. LeClear, The Rad Guy
TEA, Silicon Valley, Alex Cannara
Save Clean Energy, Isabelle Boemeke
Citizen’s Climate Lobby, Jim Hopf (Nuclear group)
4th Generation Blog, Canon Bryan, Amelia Tiemann
Rethinking Nuclear, Richard Steeves
Politicians & Biden Admin
Trump Administration & Congress, laid a foundation with the passage of NEIMA & NEICA
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, loudly pronuclear
Senator Cory Booker, introduced his support of nuclear power during the 2019 Primary Climate Debates
President Joe Biden, ushered in the Energy Bill of 2020, which funded the Advanced Reactor Development Program (ARDP), to accelerate commercialization of the next generation of reactors
Dept. of Energy, Secr. of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, worked overtime to introduce the Civil Nuclear Credit program in a timely way, plus, she has posted many great videos about the need for nuclear to address climate
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has expressed her support for the protection of the Palisades Nuclear Power plant and now for Holtec's application to restart it
The Infrastructure & Jobs Act, set up the Civil Nuclear Credit Program, with a $6 billion fund to save nuclear power plants, such as Palisades and Diablo Canyon
Representative Elaine Luria, has introduced a bevy of important nuclear energy bills, including the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act (’19), Nuclear Power Purchase Agreements Act (’21), and Fueling our Nuclear Future Act (’22)
All of Congress, has used voice votes to approve key pronuclear pieces of legislation
Senator Diane Feinstein, wrote about her support for Diablo Canyon in a number of OpEds
DOE’s Loan Program Office (LPO), under the leadership of Jigar Shah, has been working to provide Government-guaranteed loans to key projects
Funders
There is a small but dedicated community of funders who have shown a willing to support many of the above non-profits, as well as the various artistic and advocacy campaign initiatives. We are greatful to them, as they have allowed much of the work that others have not been willing to fund, to be produced.
[Please note: All of the above listed groups have websites that are available online. Legislation is all searchable. We are not able to provide links for every group but have provided for some that may be harder to find. If you have trouble finding information you need, please reach out through our contact form. We have had a prime seat for the last decade or so to follow the events but we cannot possibly include everyone or every group that is active in this space. However, if you think we have omitted an important contributor who should be listed as having had a meaningful impact on the decision to save Diablo Canyon, please use the comment box below to send us a private message.]
Published by Valerie Gardner in Climate change, Climate mayhem, Climate policy, Environmental support for nuclear, Government support, International support for nuclear, Investor activity, NEWS, Nucleation communications, Philanthropic support for nuclear, Politicians supporting nuclear, Pro-nuclear campaign, Solving climate, US technological leadership, Women in Nuclear
Following the release on Nov. 8, 2021 by Stanford University and MIT experts of an independently funded assessment of the costs to California of the 2018 decision to prematurely close Diablo Canyon—which was followed only a few months later by the passage of SB 100, "The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018" obligating the state to use "eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources" to supply 100% of retail sales of electricity in California by 2045—there has been a renewed effort to get the state to reconsider this ill-conceived, wasteful and expensive plan. The following are a listing of some of the published responses that we've seen emerge from experts weighing in about this matter.
(Click to see the Report.)
NOV. 10
The Economist: Will the climate crisis force America to reconsider nuclear power? Reaching net-zero targets will be much harder without it.
"The Golden State’s only remaining nuclear plant provides nearly 9% of its electricity generation, and accounts for 15% of its clean-electricity production. Yet despite California’s aggressive climate goals and a national push to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, Diablo Canyon is set to close down by 2025. A new report from researchers at Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) reveals just how detrimental that would be.
NOV. 11
CalMatters Guest Commentary by Assemblymember Jordan Cunningham (R) and Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg (D): Keep Diablo Canyon open to help meet emissions reduction goals.
"What if everything California and the nation is doing to slow climate change just isn’t enough?
To reach our zero-carbon goals while maintaining system reliability and avoiding debilitating blackouts, we need a mix of clean energy sources – renewables like solar and wind power. We need aggressive investment in energy storage projects. And we need to revisit whether Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant should continue to operate another 10 years past its scheduled 2025 decommissioning."
"There is a serious risk that we will not be able meet our emission reduction targets while maintaining grid reliability without Diablo Canyon. Merely replacing the clean power we lose from the plant will require 90,000 acres of development of renewable resources, even as the siting of new renewable energy plants and associated transmission have proven slow to develop and face substantial opposition. Keeping Diablo Canyon online would guard against these risks, and, if additional renewables are brought online, dramatically accelerate carbon reductions."
NOV. 16
Washington Post Editorial Board Opinion: Closing California's last nuclear power plant would be a mistake.
"If the state is serious about achieving carbon neutrality over the next few decades — and it should be — it cannot start by shutting down a source of emissions-free energy that accounts for nearly 10 percent of its in-state electricity production."
NOV. 16
San Luis Obispo Tribune, by Kaytlyn Leslie: There’s a new push to keep Diablo Canyon open. Here are 5 things you need to know.
"According to the study, the benefits of keeping Diablo Canyon open even just 10 years past its closure date in 2025 include:
-
- A 10% annual reduction of California’s power sector carbon emission;
- A reduction in the state’s reliance on natural gas;
- The potential for new clean energy sources such as hydrogen fuel production;
- A source of desalinated water in a time of drought, and
- Helping the state avoid more rolling power outages such as the ones that hit in 2020.
- Additionally, the power plant would save ratepayers a total of $2.6 billion if kept open another 10 years, and an estimated $21 billion if kept open 20 additional years, researchers said.
NOV. 18
Engineering News-Record, by Mary B. Powers: Delay Close of Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant, MIT-Stanford Study Says.
"Scientists and engineers from Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology claim in a new report that delaying retirement of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo County, Calif., by a decade until 2035 would reduce carbon emissions from state utilities by more than 10% and save $2.6 billion in power costs.
With accelerating effects of climate change, issues facing California “compel a reassessment” of the closure plan, researchers say. The 2,240-MW two-unit plant, which began operating in the mid 1980s, can remain economic for the foreseeable future, they said.
Using it for desalination also could also increase fresh water in the state for a significantly lower cost than other methods, the academics said. Extending the plant operating license to 2045 would reduce the need for 18 GW of solar power to meet state requirements and spare 90,000 acres of land needed for its production, the researchers said. Approval to build desalination and hydrogen production plants would be needed. "
NOV. 21
Los Angeles Times OpEd by Drs. Steven Chu and Ernest Moniz: California needs to keep the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant open to meet its climate goals.
"Researchers at MIT and Stanford University . . . found that an inclusive strategy that preserves the clean electricity from Diablo Canyon will augment new energy generation from renewables and other sources of clean power. We need to increase renewables at a massive scale, but that will take decades, so any zero-carbon source we retire today will set us back years on the zero-carbon journey.
Carbon-free power is also essential for system reliability and resilience because, beyond the short-term variability, there are weeks and months when wind and solar power are low and storage technologies are of inadequate duration. This is not an either/or situation: California needs both Diablo Canyon and renewables to significantly reduce emissions over the next two decades.
Revisiting the decision to close Diablo Canyon will involve many stakeholders, including federal regulators needed to permit restart of the license extension process. But that dialogue needs to happen because the stakes are so high.
Reimagining Diablo Canyon’s role in California’s energy future is an opportunity we cannot afford to ignore."
DEC. 4
Rally to Save Clean Energy planned by Climate Activists: A coalition of climate and pronuclear groups have organized a rally in San Luis Obispo on Saturday, Dec. 4, 2021. To learn more about the event and to register to attend, go to SaveCleanEnergy.com.
Published by Nucleation Capital in Anti-nuclear campaign, Brilliant thinkers, Carbon emissions, Climate change, Climate policy, Construction costs, LINKS, Macro Energy Systems, Nuclear competitiveness, Politicians supporting nuclear, Pro-nuclear campaign, Solving climate, Zero emission energy
Opinion authors Andrew Fillat and Henry Miller are highly critical of how politicians have handled addressing climate change. Whether it is a lack of critical thinking among politician or whether it is a highly calculated view of the lack of critical thinking among their environmental supporters is not entirely clear but "wishful thinking and flawed assumptions" do clear abound within the spheres setting policy in places like California, New York and elsewhere.
Key among the authors' multitude of complaints, what they call the single greatest sin is the "demonization of nuclear power, including the shutdown of existing nuclear plants that remain serviceable." We could not agree more. So, while this opinion piece levies some harsh judgements for politicians and climate activists, these pronouncements are paired with some really important metrics that more people should be aware of.
The authors seem to have culled their collection of numbers from Jacopo Buongiorno of MIT, a renowned nuclear engineering professor and author of many important research papers about nuclear energy—unfortunately without linking to their sources. Professor Buongiorno has studied the life-cycle of power plants of all kinds, from mining and construction to decommissioning and disposal of waste and ultimately buildings. We have seen many of his reports and are delighted to find these numbers pulled out for easy reference.
According to the authors, Buongiorno has found that:
-
- the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for nuclear are 1/700th those of coal
1/400th of gas, and one-fourth of solar - Nuclear requires 1/2,000th as much land as wind and around 1/400th as much as solar
- For any given power output, the amount of raw material used to build a nuclear plant is a small fraction of an equivalent solar or wind farm.
- Although nuclear waste is obviously more difficult to dispose of, its volume is 1/10,000th that of solar and 1/500th of wind (this includes abandoned infrastructure and all the toxic substances that end up in landfills.)
- One person’s lifetime use of nuclear power would produce about a half-ounce of waste.
- Even including the Chernobyl disaster, human mortality from coal is 2,000 to 3,000 times that of nuclear, while oil claims 400 times as many lives.
- the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for nuclear are 1/700th those of coal
Read this opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal's Nuclear Power Is the Best Climate-Change Solution by Far, by Andrew I. Fillat and Henry I. Miller, published November 4, 2021.
Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Carbon emissions, Climate change, Future of Energy, Land Use by Energy, LINKS, Nuclear innovation, Reduced ecosystem impacts, Solving climate, Zero emission energy
Sign up to receive Nucleation Insights
For New Investors
For Donors & Advocates
For Current Investors
(Note: Must be logged in at AngelList)
Nucleation Direct Messages
Nucleation (Fund I) Posts
Your Portfolio Dashboard
Your Funding Page
How to Contact Us
© 2026 Nucleation Capital | Terms & Policies
