diablo canyon nuclear power plant

Rabooka [deleted] says:

I didn't think you could fly this close to the plant for security reasons.

I love all the pics you took Mar!
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

Hmmm... I don't know the rules, Bec. BUT... this is the second time I've flown this close. :) Thanks Bec! xxoo
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Emporer Rhubarb [deleted] says:

That is fantastic, except the power plant looks like the model in "Local Hero"-do say you have seen that Em!
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

I've seen it Al, but it was a long time ago. Maybe I'll rent it some time soon.

Hey Al, Rabooka up above is my little sister. :)
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

stonebird    says:

Flag this photo as classified.
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Muggins formerly known as wesleypegden says:

Built on a fault line ?
The stupidity of those in power knows no bounds
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

foutugraphe says:

Indeed...

Gorgeous picture though
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Escargot says:

It's kind of beautiful, seen from a distance (it IS the Chernobyl anniversary today, isn't it...)

Hello to Rabooka!
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Vision Aerie    says:

It was Diablo Canyon before the plant was built. I think they could have named the plant something else, however, if they were concerned about PR. Construction started around 1969 or even earlier, and it didn't start generating until sometime in the early 80's, I think, mainly due to the discovery of the Hosgri fault after construction was well underway in the 70's. I think a geologist at the time of the planning for this plant could have assumed there would be a fault there, as there are small faults all over California, especially along the coast, not so far from the San Andreas fault. I think the American public was just waking up to the macinations big business back then, and it seems they (or about 1/2 of them, anyways) may be going back to sleep these days as evidenced by our political climate.
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Tiggywinkle    says:

Cool pic, em--although I am also surprised that they allow people to fly that close.

Al, I've seen "Local Hero" several times; my husband and I both really enjoyed that one. It turns up on tv from time to time; I always make sure to watch when it's on.
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

rskoon    says:

I can't see why PG&E ever got the opportunity to build this plant, a nuclear power plant that in all likelihood can never be dismantled in one of the most beautiful locations in California... or the world. I think we can thank Ronald Reagan for that!
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

Thanks for the comments everyone (and for great background, VA).

rskoon - the deal was made in the 50s under either Earl Warren or Goodwin Jess Knight (both Republicans).

It wasn't just the fault line that was the problem. They had actually drawn the blue prints BACKWARDS. Something so dangerous that required such strict safety measures? They were going to build it backwards. The mind boggles.
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

deborah d. lattimore    says:

go america
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Crfullmoon says:

Uh-oh.
Posted 57 months ago. ( permalink )

Automatt    says:

Hey emdot, I wrote about this on my site www.sprol.com some time ago, so I featured this shot with a link to the original post. My shots were all from space. What are you flying here? How do you learn to do that?
Posted 56 months ago. ( permalink )

tjerkb    says:

I like this the most of your airborne set. Isn`t the world beautiful from the air. Imagine the possibilities for us photographers if we were pilots! Love shot, nice light. Also love the tekst and little remarks on the picture itself, makes me smile on friday. Have a good weekend. Tjerk
Posted 48 months ago. ( permalink )

nj dodge    says:

The notes and tags are fun. I like it, but you do have 199 more interesting images. Roger
Posted 47 months ago. ( permalink )

Twinmama    says:

I HATE THIS PLANT. I wish with all my heart it had never been built.

Mothers for Peace, y'all.

P.S. Way to prove how "secure" our plants really are.
Posted 47 months ago. ( permalink )

thepaingiver79 says:

This is obviously a plagerism... You flew next to this and took a photo?

I don't think so.. This same photo is on several web sites, one including the wikipedia.
Posted 26 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

Here's my exif data, paingiver:
www.flickr.com/photo_exif.gne?id=11040625

if you view the wikipedia site you will see that they credit me as the photographer (my first name is marya):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Diablo_canyon_nuc lear_power_p...

and the guy who was flying the plane is here:
www.flickr.com/photos/vision_aerie/

you should check out his stream for some really awesome aerial photography.

here is the set w/ the rest of the photos i took that day:
www.flickr.com/photos/emdot/sets/273076/

and finally, here's me in the plane:
www.flickr.com/photos/vision_aerie/10904639/
Posted 26 months ago. ( permalink )

mnorri    says:

Hi. I don't know if you know, but your picture was used in a TED talk by Juan Enriquez. It's a pretty cool talk, I figured you'd appreciate the link.
Posted 24 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

mnorri -- thank you so much for letting me know. i just watched the whole talk (about 18 minutes) and learned a lot. PLUS, enriquez got a laugh after my photo ("lets hope next time you decide to build a nuclear power plant it's not on a beautiful seaside next to an earthquake fault."). Awesome!
Posted 24 months ago. ( permalink )

maol    says:

Sweet little plant. Funny thing operating it in an unstable area, though. Great foresight. Really... Anyhoo... no matter how great an accident could be, the number of deaths per kWh compared to all other ways to make electricity is bound to be low. Always something. ;-)
Posted 24 months ago. ( permalink )

edwardyanquen says:

hello!
your photo has been used in my blog, if you have any problem please tell me
Posted 23 months ago. ( permalink )

ht3r_coord says:

Which Star-Wars episode are you referring to in the picture? I'm really curious now.
Posted 21 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

The Imperial March!! ;)
Posted 21 months ago. ( permalink )

cuddle1979 says:

I absolutely love this photo! I'm completely fascinated by electricity and nuclear energy. Would love to see it in person, walk inside, and hear the roar of the turbines! Thanks for the great shot!
Posted 20 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

cuddle1979 -- i think they give tours. your dream could be reality. :) (and thanks for the kind words.)

:)
Posted 20 months ago. ( permalink )

Ned Trifle    says:

I guess the idea is that if anything goes wrong they just push the whole thing into the sea? AND NO-ONE WILL EVER KNOW...

Good, interesting photo. I'm surprised the power plant doesn't use it for publicity!
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

Jayel Aheram    says:

Maybe he meant you plagiarized the EXIF data? ;)
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

warhead    says:

Wow, that power plant has big titties.
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

CreekBedThreads says:

"DCPP is one the strongest structures on the face of the earth; built to withstand the largest earthquake deemed credible from the nearest earthquake fault. PG&E is the only utility in the country that employees a fully staffed seismic department with a mission to continually assess the current state of seismic knowledge as well as large earthquakes around the world. This information is then applied to DCPP so we can be sure that the facility remains safe based on up to date science. "

www.pge.com/myhome/edusafety/systemworks/diab locanyon/
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

diablo is built in one of the most beautiful coastlines of california and borders a state park.

the town it is in has only one road out -- difficult to the say the least if they needed to evacuate.

diablo is built three miles off of the hosgri earthquake fault.

diablo is built in a delicate terrain filled with wildlife that is or has been protected.

when it was being built, the blueprints were printed BACKWARDS.

it was and continues to be a bad location for a nuclear power plant and everyone involved with the building of it should be ashamed.


----

and i just have to add: i don't believe you can get unbiased information from the company that runs the facility. of course they are going to stress certain "positive" aspects. i think it is smarter to get information from scientific sources with no negative or positive ties to it.
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

Twinmama    says:

Do you work for the plant? And have you entertained any thoughts at all about the scenario that could occur if they're wrong?
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

uʌ    says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Industrial Archaeology Map, and we'd love to have this added to the group!
Posted 16 months ago. ( permalink )

col_robert_richter says:

Twinmama, have you thought about how many tons of carbon dioxide a single nuclear plant prevents from entering the atmosphere in one day of operation? Do you know the difference in a prompt neutron and a delayed neutron and understand why a 1950's plant is intrinsically safe? If not then you shouldn't be commenting on the safety of the plant or its ecological impact. Your camera uses electricity, as does your computer, so YOU are part of the demand for power and thus part of the problem that nuclear power solves. There are very few "clean" sources of power. Unfortunately so many clueless americans are so afraid of nuclear power that this nation's energy policy has favored coal and other forms of non-renewable energy that promote oil dependence for far too many years. The USA would be in better shape if new nuclear plants were constructed today to reduce our demand for foreign fuels, pave the way for electric cars, and create an energy plan that will sustain the country for the next 100 years. Uneducated & unfounded fear over nuclear power by the public is equally dumb as saying "I don't want any future solar power development because solar cells are made in semiconductor plants that have nasty chemicals in them and polute" Unless you want the US to fall to third world standards where you get power for 3 hours at random evey day then you need to appreciate the value nuclear offers us.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

col robert richter, are you aware of how many people are put into risk by building a plant near an active earthquake fault, in a town that only has one two-laned road out of it? that the blueprints were backwards?
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

jb449    says:

The blueprints were backwards? I guess that proves the plant will fail catastrophically. They fixed that little problem dear. The only result was a small waste of time and money.

This plant and all other nuclear power plants are so over engineered and are subject to so much regulatory oversight that it would require a ridiculous number of failures combined with a large number of people deliberately sabotaging several redundant safety mechanisms in order to cause a serious problem.

There is indeed an earthquake fault a few miles from the fault. The Hosgri fault, named after the two scientist that discovered it, may be capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude between 6.5 and 7.5. The 7.5 "Hosgri Event" is one of those once in several thousands of years kind of event. It is also very possible that an earthquake of that magnitude will never happen on that fault. You will be glad to know that Diablo is designed to survive a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. But, your home, your business, schools, hospitals, water and sewage pipes, roads, bridges, etc, are NOT designed to survive an earthquake anywhere near that strong. So if you are lucky enough to survive the Hosgri event, you will have more important things to worry about.

Relatively recently, Japan had a very bad earthquake. Their Nuclear power plants automatically shut down and nothing too exciting happened to them.

As far as building a power plant on the pristine California coast. The actual power plant takes up a very small foot print. It would take thousands of wind turbines or about 36 square miles of solar panels to get the same output as the two units at DCPP. Much of the land around DCPP was purchased by PG&E because at the time they got a good deal. Because that land is generally off limits to the public, it still remains in pristine condition. No cigarette butts, beer cans, etc...

FYI. Although there is only one regularly maintained road leading in and out of the plant, there are two other roads that could be used in an evacuation. There is also a helipad, and if you really wanted to, boats could also be used to get people away.

The worst nuclear disaster in US history happened on at the Three Mile Island power plant, over 30 years ago, and NOBODY got hurt. You have to admit that an accident where no one gets hurt is the best kind to have. Their two other reactors are still up and running. Oh and a recent survey found that nearly 90% of local residents are in favor of keeping the plant up and running for another 20 years.

Any questions?
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

Any questions?

Yes, how did you get so patronizing and sarcastic?

That said, nuclear energy is all "fine and good" until chernobyl happens in your backyard.

Unfortunately, this Chernobyl IS in my backyard. I care very much.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

uʌ    says:

unfortunately, we dont know what to do with nuclear waste, and it has a half life of a few billion years. yikes!
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

yup. and there is that.

such a "little" detail. like the "little" bit of money printing the freaking blueprints backwards caused.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

One more comment... JB449 mentions alternate roads out of the plant. That is the plant and NOT the town of Avila Beach. So, lucky workers at Diablo can be easily evacuated. Not so lucky residents are screwed.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

Twinmama    says:

"They fixed that little problem dear." Ha ha ha. Famous last words.

Also? "The worst nuclear disaster in US history happened on at the Three Mile Island power plant, over 30 years ago, and NOBODY got hurt." I don't really believe this. A friend of my family who was going to college next door to it when that happened has just developed a weird kind of leukemia that usually only occurs with radiation exposure. A local worker at the plant here also got leukemia (and yes, he went in the core area, I believe). Coincidence? I wonder.

Your BS sounds like someone who works for PG&E, frankly.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

jb449    says:

I happen to believe that the success of this country depends on supporting nuclear power. Something like 20% of all electrical power generated in the U.S. comes from nuclear power. I don't think the majority of people would support living without electricity. It has to come from somewhere. This "not in my backyard" attitude needs to go away.

Chernobyl is not in your back yard. Nuclear plants are designed differently here in the U.S. The reactors in the U.S. are designed much safer than the RBMK reactors involved in Chernobyl. On top of a safer plant designs, all nuclear reactors in the U.S. have rugged containment structures.

Chernobyl happened because they let a bunch of inexperienced operators conduct an experimental test. They deactivated several safety mechanisms and didn't fully understand the consequences for doing so. When the plant started to run away from them, they didn't know what to do.
I believe there are still some RBMK reactors in operation. After Chernobyl they got beefed up safety mechanisms and people understood the importance of only letting experienced operators run a nuclear plant. There hasn't been an incident like it since.

The nuclear waste issue, like most other issues brought against nuclear power, are overblown. Sure, the waste remains radioactive for what seems like forever, but this needs to be put into perspective. Bananas, manure, concrete, granite counter tops, and lots of other stuff are technically radioactive if you look hard enough. Even our bodies contain a trace amount of a radioactive isotope of carbon.

Most of the really nasty stuff in nuclear waste goes away relatively quickly (few hundred years). The stuff that sticks around millions of years is relatively stable and thus not that big of a problem. Remember, radiation is the decay of particles. Atoms are physically breaking apart and the little pieces they send flying are what we call radiation. The more radioactive something is the faster it breaks down into a stable form.

Also, nuclear fuel is so energy dense that it doesn't take much of it to produce a significant amount of power. When the fuel is spent, the fuel still contains 95% of its energy. If people want to cut down on nuclear waste they should support recycling it.

Many people get cancer, it is not a happy thing. Most people that get cancer do not work at or near nuclear power plants. You could walk around in the core area for hours and not pick up as much dose as a chest x-ray. The biggest source of radiation for most people is the sun. Everybody seems to like the sun.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

Crfullmoon says:

Then there's the matter of the propaganda
to keep the public from knowing about and/or trying to prepare for
the H5N1 pandemic flu being delayed abraod by Rapid Response and Containment of human-to-human clusters (by movement restricitons and Tamiflu, until one or the other fails).

emdot, please read around GetPandemicReady.org
and PFI Pandemic Flu Information Forum and take care of yourself.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

geo_milan says:

awesome !*
Posted 13 months ago. ( permalink )

mikebaird    says:

marya, You know I'm an admin for a group called photomorrobay, and we'd love to have this added to the group! You are one super Flickr resident - a model for others to follow.


--
Seen on news.yahoo.com (?)
Posted 13 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

thanks for the invite, mike. it's been added. :)
Posted 13 months ago. ( permalink )

strobe_n says:

wow, your aerial photo of the power plant certainly generated a lively discussion. I remember photographing the protestors climbing over the security fence in 1978 or 79, not sure because I don't have the negs anymore. That sure was an interesting time in our county back then.
Posted 13 months ago. ( permalink )

maol    says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Nuclear Power Stations, and we'd love to have this added to the group!
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

geatman says:

Nuclear power is a losser:
Amory Lovin's explains it quite well as to why we should forget nuclear energy and focus on alternative energy and efficiency: www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid467.php
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

uʌ    says:

i cannot believe this conversation is still going on = ) emdot you must think this is quite funny, this photo shows up on my main page every other day. tis a great image, and causing quite a controversy. =)
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

ha. urban -- it is surprising.

PRO TIP: for those of you sick of seeing this pop up in your flickr comment stream, you can "mute" this by clicking the red circle to the right of the photo (while in your response stream). then you won't see it anymore. :)
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

uʌ    says:

im not sick of it yet i think its great!
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

jurassic john    says:

More power to you!
Please join our group and add this excellent picture
PLEASE READ THE GROUP RULES BEFORE JOINING

www.flickr.com/groups/pttp/
Post to the "POWER TO THE PEOPLE" pool
Post one, Comment one
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

JeremyLW says:

I remember all the protest going on over this in the 80's and the Iron Workers wifes went out and protested for it with shirts and sighns that said " a little nukey never hurt nothing "
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

jurassic john    says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Power to the People, and we'd love to have this added to the group!
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

Hadassah28 (Martha's Vine - Main book done!)    says:

Thank you so much for posting this photo to Power to the People. Your “powerful” image is “charged” with excellence.. This photo should “generate” much interest. You obviously have the creative “spark.” (Corny, I know, but sometimes life is just too serious.) Thanks again for joining us.

More power to you!
This excellent picture was seen in POWER TO THE PEOPLE
PLEASE REMEMBER THE GROUP RULES

www.flickr.com/groups/pttp/
"POWER TO THE PEOPLE"
Post one, Comment one
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

emdot    says:

The Future of Nuclear Power
from Librarians' Internet Index: New This Week
This 2003 report "discusses the interrelated technical, economic, environmental, and political challenges facing a significant increase in global nuclear power utilization." The report finds "prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited, by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term management of nuclear wastes." From the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Rodrigo_Soldon    says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Wonderful photos for the world Pls post 1-comment 3_Contest OPEM, and we'd love to have this added to the group!
Posted 10 months ago. ( permalink )

Adrian Midgley    says:

Lots and lots of electricity also deserves a note on the picture.
Posted 6 months ago. ( permalink )

Twinmama    says:

Yeah except it doesn't produce lots and lots. Even when it's running right, which more than half the time it isn't.
Posted 5 months ago. ( permalink )

Adrian Midgley    says:

If you say so.

The report from your energy administration gives the capacity factor as 90% and 99% for the two reactors, 6% reduction from maximum capacity looks significantly different to "more than half" to me.

The rated output is about a gigawatt per unit, which I think is about standard for a _big_ generator unit.

Google gives you the report in a matter of moments, my experience is that many remarks about complex matters are made without benefit of any reference or looking for the answers to questions that have been answered many times before. I try to avoid that myself.
Posted 5 months ago. ( permalink )

jb449    says:

Twinmama, you discredit yourself when you have to resort to blatant lies. Nuclear power plants across the board have some of the highest capacity factors. Solar power has a 20% capacity factor on a good day.

There are over 10,000 hydrocarbon based power plants, almost 4000 hydroelectric plants, and only 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S. Yet, nuclear power makes up about 20% of all the power produced here.

Oh yeah, there also hasn't been a serious nuclear accident in the U.S. since 1979, and no one was injured as a result off that event.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )