If Nothing Else, Nuclear Power Has a Future as a Debate Topic

“Twilight of the Nukes,” (Oct. 13) raised doubts about nuclear power’s future in a deregulated, competitive energy marketplace. Southern California Edison is confident that nuclear power will continue to be an important contributor to the diverse mix of energy production in California as the state moves into the competitive arena.

We should first underscore the need for California to maintain diversified energy sources and not rely too heavily on any single source (as was done with crude oil in the 1970s). Nuclear power currently represents a substantial 20% of that mix, which is approximately the national average.

A major contributor is the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, which historically has enjoyed an outstanding safety and operational record. The Nucleonics Week national survey you cited ranks San Onofre well above average (not the lower third) among nuclear plants in terms of cost performance over a three-year period ending Dec. 31, 1995. Any single year of lower performance reflects scheduled refueling outages at the plant.

Independent power costs are the biggest reason that California electric rates exceed the national average by almost 50%. Utilities were required--under state and federal laws--to enter into these very expensive, long-term contracts with independent power producers.

San Onofre has done more than just produce reliable, clean, nonpolluting energy for millions of customers for over a decade. It has also contributed some $250 million annually to the regional economy. San Onofre remains a valuable part of a diverse mix of energy resources that helps maintain electric system reliability and cost stability. We’d say it has a bright future.

HAROLD B. RAY

Executive vice president

for power generation

Southern California Edison

Rosemead

*

I thought your article on the economic cost of energy produced by the San Onofre nuclear power plant and of nuclear energy in general once faced with competition in a free market was very informative.

What I do take issue with is the touting of the nuclear power industry’s great deception: [that] nuclear power is clean energy. An industry and its product cannot be called clean when it produces the most long-lived deadly waste known to humankind with no known safe long-term disposal or containment. Since 1983 at San Onofre and at nuclear plants all across the country, irradiated fuel rods are being stored in cooling ponds never designed for long-term storage.

Additionally, generating electricity with radioactive fuel is only a portion of the waste stream. It begins from the mining of uranium and continues through milling, processing, enrichment and production of the fuel rods. This waste stream continues during the operation of nuclear power plants during accidents, spills, repairs and refueling. Then, once closed, there is more waste to deal with during plant decommissioning.

MARION PACK

Executive director

Alliance for Survival

Santa Ana

*

*

The story reported that under deregulation, utilities will continue to be reimbursed by consumers for the bulk of the bloated construction costs for nuclear plants, plus a healthy return to investors. Doubtless consumers will also end up paying the inestimable costs of storing and protecting the waste from our nuclear plants over centuries.

It is maddening that our public utilities commissions, legislatures and governors have allowed consumers to be sold down the river by the nuclear power industry.

MAITLAND B. ALEXANDER

Thousand Oaks