• News Ticker alerts

Southern California Edison, majority owner and operator of the failed San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in northern San Diego County, announced Sunday (September 22) that the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission has “identified flaws in how Mitsubishi Heavy Industries used its computer codes to design the failed steam generators” at the plant.

Specifically, the flawed calculations, per Edison, failed to properly model the vibration that would occur in steam tubes under load, which caused many to prematurely weaken and one to burst, releasing a small amount of radiation into the atmosphere that led to a prolonged emergency shutdown before Edison abandoned hopes of restarting operations at the facility earlier this year.

Edison vice president and chief nuclear officer Pete Dietrich was quick to offload as much of the blame for the failures at San Onofre onto the partner Edison selected for implementation of the new generator design as possible.

“Mitsubishi designed the system. Mitsubishi built the system. Mitsubishi's system failed. They are the experts. SCE was the customer,” said Dietrich via release.

Despite the findings of negligence, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission did not impose any fines on Mitsubishi or Edison as a result.

  • News Ticker alerts

Comments

Diogenes Sept. 23, 2013 @ 8:04 a.m.

So why did Edison keep saying that it was safe?

Profits trump safety. Unless Edison had legal exposure for the economic damages the inevitable meltdown from the "vibrations" the corporations will act in their own self-interest.

Price Anderson Act encourages operators to take bigger risks because their competitors are also cutting corners. The operators' liability is essentially a small deductible. US taxpayers would fund the payment of damages, such as they are, to the extent permitted under the Act.

If SONGS melted down, residents of San Diego could not seek damages for their pain and suffering nor diminution in the value of their real estate. San Diegans would have to suck it up.

Compare this to Filner Gate. There would be no Gloria Allred lotto-winners; just losers. Filner opposed the restart.

I would prefer having my backside pinched for $5, 000,000 than having it nuked for nothing.

Much credit goes to Barbara Boxer and those who worked at the grassroots level, including whistleblowers.

Without those efforts, San Diego would have been worse than Fukushima.

1

Founder Sept. 23, 2013 @ 1:44 p.m.

Send an email to help San Diego lower Energy costs! http://www.sandiegoenergydistrict.org/san-diego-county-options.html

+ Ask SD County Supervisors To Study Community Energy: http://eepurl.com/FHk4T

+

Then there are health problems for all those living near nuclear power plants since they leak and vent radioactivity and don't even have to disclose to the public what is leaking or the amounts that have been released to the atmosphere!

Salute to Joe Mangano.... San Onofre Cancer Report Published http://www.radiation.org/reports/California%20report%202013.pdf

0

Founder Sept. 23, 2013 @ 1:49 p.m.

From the Web: Ha Ha Ha Now SCE wants $ 2.4 Billion for their shareholders after taking ratepayers to the cleaners with their faulty in-house designed replacement steam generators that was supposed to save ratepayers a Billion dollars but failed almost as soon as they were installed!

Unit 2 & Unit 3 now have more steam generator tube damage that all the rest of the nuclear fleet combined; but the real reason that San Onofre is being decommissioned is that SCE cannot afford to have the CPUC continue its investigation into the reasonableness of the replacement project because should all the facts be made public, SCE (and minority owners SDG&E 20% and Riverside County 2% ) may be potentially on the hook for 10 to 15 Billion dollars in ratepayer REBATES, and since SCE is a deep pocket they cannot afford to take that risk!

Ask for your rebate on Oct 1, 2013

0

Diogenes Sept. 23, 2013 @ 2:38 p.m.

Founder,

There was a finding of negligence by the NRC. The PUC hearing should result in rebates, not increased rates. It would be interesting to watch the hearings.

The shareholders need to understand that nuclear energy is more expensive in the long run.

0

Founder Sept. 23, 2013 @ 2:49 p.m.

Should Ratepayers Pay SDG&E’s San Onofre Costs? Hearing October 1st in San Diego + Comments

http://obrag.org/?p=76622&cpage=1#comment-293390

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close