Calif. utility to retire troubled San Onofre nuclear power plant

Submitted by spdrun on June 7, 2013 - 9:31am.

Yay! Let's burn more coal. No way the dumb NIMBY mofos will allow construction of a clean, nuclear replacement.

Pretty sad that the French have more balls than American environancies.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 7, 2013 - 9:44am.

Time to get the solar panels installed and buy a back-up generator.

It will be interesting to see if this has an impact on the north San Diego and San Clemente RE values.

Always thought the plant was kind of holding the region back from developing more business.

Sorry but really who wants to open a Biz or live next to a nuclear plant.

Submitted by spdrun on June 7, 2013 - 9:53am.

I'd have no issue with it, assuming the plant was safety run and of modern design. It will be replaced with more coal burnt in states like UT, CO, and AZ.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 7, 2013 - 10:00am.

I would have to think you are an exception There spdrun.

definitely can tell you’re not from SoCal, Just kidding!!

Submitted by spdrun on June 7, 2013 - 10:04am.

Hell, I live about 3 min walk from a (gas/oil) power and steam plant right now :)

Anyway, replacing an aging plant with a dirtier one out of sight, out of mind isn't the solution in my book.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 7, 2013 - 10:06am.

The-Shoveler wrote:
Time to get the solar panels installed and buy a back-up generator.

You need a very expensive battery off-grid arrangement. Otherwise, when the grid is down, it pulls your system down too.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 7, 2013 - 10:10am.

That's what the backup generator is for.

Hopefully that will be the exception,

Submitted by FlyerInHi on June 7, 2013 - 10:42am.

If camp Pendleton were to close, that would be prime real estate for a new houses and business parks.

Submitted by spdrun on June 7, 2013 - 11:01am.

That would also kill a lot of business.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 7, 2013 - 11:01am.

FlyerInHi wrote:
If camp Pendleton were to close, that would be prime real estate for a new houses and business parks.

Yea I have always thought that as well, but it does not look like that is going to happen in my lifetime.

The military seems to be consolidating into that area.

Other bases get closed, camp Pendleton keeps growing (in personal etc...).

Submitted by FlyerInHi on June 7, 2013 - 11:48am.

Yea. What is that giant building by the freeway at camp pendleton?

Submitted by The-Shoveler on June 7, 2013 - 1:02pm.

Actually I had that wrong,

Its going to be a new Naval Hospital

But I had heard something about research labs and offices as well.

Submitted by CDMA ENG on June 7, 2013 - 1:43pm.

Damnit!

Now I am going to have to pee in my wetsuit to stay warm! Surfing Old Man's at San O was great with the 10 degree warmer water coming out of the heat exchangers...

:P

Building the last mile of Cellular since 0'10.

CE

Submitted by ocrenter on June 7, 2013 - 5:38pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
The-Shoveler wrote:
Time to get the solar panels installed and buy a back-up generator.

You need a very expensive battery off-grid arrangement. Otherwise, when the grid is down, it pulls your system down too.

Did the calculation a few month ago, breakeven for solar panels were still over 10 years, counting gov rebates. The lease schemes all involve pretty high interest rates that they do not want to disclose.

Am I wrong about this? Anyone gotten solar recently?

Submitted by patb on June 7, 2013 - 10:33pm.

it will be replaced by Wind.

cheaper.

Submitted by patb on June 7, 2013 - 10:33pm.

rates are dropping like mad

Submitted by patb on June 7, 2013 - 10:34pm.

or you need wind.

Submitted by patb on June 7, 2013 - 10:35pm.

battery is dropping in price too.

Submitted by curiousmind on June 8, 2013 - 10:06am.

A friend of mine that works there stopped by not an hour after posting this. From a personal perspective, and all other things aside, I can't imagine anything better for him. Unfortunately that remains to be seen. The Black Swan always needs a hug.

Submitted by treehugger on June 10, 2013 - 11:16am.

I wonder, do folks understand that they have 60 years to fully close that thing down? Edison leases the land from Camp Pendleton and the lease states something along the lines of the land will be returned as it was found.....

Rumored 1,100 workers to be laid off in the next few months, starting in August. A skeleton crew of 400 will remain (let's not forget that site must still remain secure 24/7 for the next several decades). These are good paying highly specialized jobs. I have a friend whose husband was informed on Friday he will be losing his job. They currently reside in North County and will relocate within the next few months, hopefully just up to SLO and the El Diablo plant. At what point will the economic impacts to San Diego and Orange County be analyzed? The impacts to environmental/biological, socio-economic, utilities, water quality/resources, recreation, traffic, hazardous material/waste, cultural (yes there is a burial site under there), land use, visual, safety and environmental health, etc... of closing the plant have not even begun to be analyzed, good or bad. The folks who are SOOO excited when they heard SONGS was closing they cried, should demand that analysis in a timely manner.

Desal starting construction in Carlsbad, has been looking for a toe-hold on CPEN.

Might I remind folks that the ONLY reason that 17 miles of mostly open coastline between San Diego and Orange County still exists is because of the United States Marine Corps! Camp Pendleton is home to 16 threatened and endangered species that are thriving because everyone else wants to build houses everywhere! Camp Pendleton is NOT going away and we should be damn happy about that.

END RANT.

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 10, 2013 - 12:44pm.

Thank you for your RANT, treehugger. I agree with all of it. SD County has enough housing to last thru at least three more boom-and-bust cycles at which time the remaining employers here who have consolidated operations here or elsewhere in the state, country or world will be controlling the few local companies/installations with FT secure jobs.

As I have stated here repeatedly, it is not the job (and shouldn't be the goal) of those running CA's coastal cities and counties to approve endless housing permits into oblivion just for the sake of attracting new residents. We don't need any new residents, and, in any case, if they move here and want to buy a residence, they can shop the resales on offer to them at the time.

CA coastal areas within ~eight miles of the coast were never set up for the young "worker-bee set" to live a luxurious, carefree life of their dreams. They are actually "move up" areas for those who have already paid their dues in life and/or for those who are otherwise financially secure.

As it has always been and should be.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 10, 2013 - 12:45pm.

ocrenter wrote:
no_such_reality wrote:
The-Shoveler wrote:
Time to get the solar panels installed and buy a back-up generator.

You need a very expensive battery off-grid arrangement. Otherwise, when the grid is down, it pulls your system down too.

Did the calculation a few month ago, breakeven for solar panels were still over 10 years, counting gov rebates. The lease schemes all involve pretty high interest rates that they do not want to disclose.

Am I wrong about this? Anyone gotten solar recently?

Ten sounds about right.

Meanwhile, 97 cent monthly electric bills with the AC set to 72 is PFN. :-)

The leases make sense if you've got very high electric bills each month, think regularly into tier 5. Leases are problematic if you want to sell, the buyer needs to assume the lease.

Submitted by ocrenter on June 10, 2013 - 2:19pm.

no_such_reality wrote:

Ten sounds about right.

Meanwhile, 97 cent monthly electric bills with the AC set to 72 is PFN. :-)

The leases make sense if you've got very high electric bills each month, think regularly into tier 5. Leases are problematic if you want to sell, the buyer needs to assume the lease.

thanks for the reply, that makes a lot more sense. The tier 5 comment also explains why most of the homes that went with solar in the neighborhood are often 30 panels and higher. We have only been in tier 4 a few times so had no idea there's such thing as tier 5.

I was thinking of the same thing about lease systems in regard to sale of the home. The buyer would need to assume the lease, but the buyer may also be assuming lease of panels that may be outdated at the time of purchase.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 10, 2013 - 3:47pm.

OC, the leases aren't like regularly leases, that's why system are over-sized. The lease is more like a discounted car rental than a long term car lease.

You pay a discounted rate for KWH used whether produced by the utility or the panel on your roof.

Any net excess production credit goes to the operator, not the homeowner. The economics of panels and inverters favor oversized systems. A 10% cost increase for the inverter and you can double the number of panels. The panels themselves aren't that expensive, the labor is as much and the labor cost is frankly the same whether you install 15 panels or 30 panels. When we installed ours that's what we did, nearly doubled the system capacity for right around 10%.

Except for the selling issue, leasing is pretty attractive.

Submitted by ocrenter on June 10, 2013 - 10:13pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
OC, the leases aren't like regularly leases, that's why system are over-sized. The lease is more like a discounted car rental than a long term car lease.

You pay a discounted rate for KWH used whether produced by the utility or the panel on your roof.

Any net excess production credit goes to the operator, not the homeowner. The economics of panels and inverters favor oversized systems. A 10% cost increase for the inverter and you can double the number of panels. The panels themselves aren't that expensive, the labor is as much and the labor cost is frankly the same whether you install 15 panels or 30 panels. When we installed ours that's what we did, nearly doubled the system capacity for right around 10%.

Except for the selling issue, leasing is pretty attractive.

I guess there are different leasing schemes out there. The quote I received involved a fixed payment monthly for the lease of the system. As for the price of the system I was quoted, increase in capacity by 10% was accompanied by increase in price by 10% as well. I also went to the wholesale solar site just to see the cost of the system without installation, the capacity vs cost increase were identical. Doubling the capacity led to doubling of cost. But maybe that's because I've been looking at smaller systems.

Submitted by cvmom on June 11, 2013 - 7:35am.

We got solar last year, payback is approx 9 years due to high energy usage for charging of electric car.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 11, 2013 - 8:20am.

cvmon, why didn't you get the electric car plan and separate meter? I thought those were like 12 cents/KWH.

OC, the market probably has been changing in the last year or so, it's gotten very trendy and I suspect the installers are milking a premium out of it.

Submitted by cvmom on June 11, 2013 - 11:42am.

no_such_reality wrote:
cvmon, why didn't you get the electric car plan and separate meter? I thought those were like 12 cents/KWH.

Hubby did the negotiations, talked to like 6 vendors and went through every possible aspect, ended up with one meter, that is all I know. :) But PM me if you really need more details and I will find out for you.

Submitted by CA renter on June 26, 2013 - 12:41am.

Just received notice the other day from SDG&E about the rate increases resulting from the closure of San Onofre. IIRC, they said the cost increase would be about $75.00 for bills over $250/month. Unfortunately, I threw the letter away, so just going from memory (which isn't always good). I would think this changes the solar calculations for many homeowners, which might put upward pressure on solar prices.

We're definitely thinking about it, but would like to hear from others who've already installed the systems. If you had to do it all over again, would you? Are you realizing the ROI that was suggested by the solar salespeople?

Thanks, in advance, for any input.

Submitted by spdrun on June 26, 2013 - 8:25am.

One good thing to come out of anti-nuke envirowhackoism, I guess. (I own SPWR stock and it's doing nicely :) )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.