|
|
| Fig. 1: View from the beach of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station located in San Clemente, CA, showing Unit 2 and Unit 3 containment Domes. (Source: Wikimedia Commons). |
In Nuclear News stated by Representative Mike Levin, there are approximately 3.5 million lbs. (1,600 tons) of nuclear fuel waste sitting in San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station waiting to be shipped to a facility for storage. [1] This is a result of an investigation after maintenance of Unit 2 of the twin nuclear reactor which they subsequently found a radioactive leak inside the containment shell of Unit 3 and immediately shutdown. All of which has now caused a decommissioning that is projected to cost $4.4 billion and a projected timeline of completion by 2029, if a repository is found for the dangerous nuclear waste. [2] To determine if this timeline will be met this article looks briefly at the recent deconstruction milestones from that have been met over 2020-2022.
Shortly after the announcement of the retirement of SONGS in 2013, efforts were put in place to set forth a decommissioning plan. Soon after this announcement, in 2014, Southern California Edison stated that it would take 20 years. [2] With a closer look at recent milestones, from songscommunity.com, we can see that efforts have been put forth. Recently, as of April 2023, it was reported that Unit 3 Crane and Turbine are nearly demolished, and 200 million pounds of waste has been shipped off-site. [3,4] Others include, from 2020, pre-construction, demolition preparation activities, and an installation of a new railyard for shipping waste in 2021 to Clive, Utah, to Unit 2 turbine building demolished in 2022. [5] As we look forward, it appears that significant efforts towards decommissioning of SONGS still remains, such as, Unit 2 and 3 radioactive waste building, hazardous material removal, and Dome containment buildings. These particular containment Domes can be seen in Fig. 1, a prominent landmark.
Although there is the appearance of progress being made towards the decommissioning of SONGS, at this moment, there is no clear plan for the repository destination for spent nuclear fuel waste and thus the decommissioning process will never be completed. [1,6] This repository was supposed to be Yucca Mountain, Nevada however in 2010 this plan was cancelled by politicians, a plan that nearly cost $15 billion. [3]
In conclusion, we have seen progress towards the decommission of SONGS. However, as we look forward towards new efforts there remains many milestones for this decommission to be complete, such as, dangerous nuclear waste, significant demolitions to radioactive waste buildings and dome containment buildings.
© Gregory Zaborski Jr. The author warrants that the work is the author's own and that Stanford University provided no input other than typesetting and referencing guidelines. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author.
[1] M. Levin, "The Spent Fuel Caucus and SONGS," Nuclear News 64, No, 12, 55 (September 2021).
[2] "Nuclear Power Reactors in California," California Energy Commission, March 2020.
[3] "Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned," U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-11-229, April 2011.
[4] "San Onofre Decommissioning Update," Southern California Edison, April 2023.
[5] "SONGS Decmmissioning Progress Report," Southern California Edison, 2020, 2021, 2022
[6] L. Davies, "Opinion: The Federal Government Must Deal With the Storage of Hazardous Nuclear Waste in San Onofre," San Diego Union Tribune, 10 Apr 23.
.jpg){kind=link}