This is California's brain on drugs

Shut down the state’s only source of zero-emissions nuclear power because …”CO2”?

In a Sunday editorial, the board criticized those advocating for the plant to remain open despite the plant operator's 2018 decision to shut down, and implored California's state government to get other renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, in place to prevent an increase in the use of natural gas following the plant's closure.

"California is approaching an energy crossroads. In three years, its last nuclear plant will begin to power down and the state will lose its largest single source of emissions-free electricity," the board wrote. "If [regulators] don’t move more quickly to replace its electricity with renewable energy from wind, solar and geothermal, the void will almost certainly be filled by burning more natural gas."

It noted that those lack of assurances had led to the formation of a campaign to keep the plant open, with such proponents arguing that doing so "would reduce climate pollution, bolster grid reliability and buy time during a crucial period in the state’s transition toward solar, wind and other renewable energy sources."

The board added the Biden administration had been receptive to suggestions for California to keep the facility open. 

"But the idea is misguided, and at this point remains largely divorced from reality," [!!!? — ed] the board wrote. "The plant’s closure should instead serve as an impetus for California do more to accelerate the shift to renewable energy and set a realistic course to meet the state’s target of getting 100% of its electricity from carbon-free sources by 2045." ….

The board argued that responsibly replacing the plant would require faster deployment of wind and solar energy sources, as well as batteries to store energy and upgrades to transmission lines. 

"It’s our planet at stake, and California’s leaders must ensure the sunset of nuclear power is not followed by a damaging rise in greenhouse gases," it added.

There is no battery technology that will store enough energy to power California from erratic and undependable solar and wind. And there are certainly no such batteries that have been built and installed.

Similarly, the state, home of some of the fiercest “environmentalists” who are notorious for delaying, and stopping everything, are not going to allow new power transmission lines to be erected to bring power from non-existent energy sources to the cities.

In two years, when this plant is shut down, California’s power generation will drop by 9.2%. Natural gas, which supplies 44% of the state’s energy needs, is already on the block and will become increasingly scarce. Good luck with that.

Those numbers are for existing electrical consumption, and don’t include the switch to electric cars in 2030 and the mandatory electrification of new homes beginning now. Oh! And the forced switch from natural gas to windmill power for all manufacturing.

This is all like watching a slow-motion car wreck, and would be enjoyable were it not for the fact that California’s huge economy plays a major part in our entire country’s wealth. And as we’ve now noticed, we are entirely dependent on its ports. What we’re experiencing now will be as nothing when California completes its self-destruction in ten years.

As non-hysterics have been saying, if you want to fight climate change, and don’t support nuclear energy, you aren’t serious. Just ask some real scientists at Stanford.