ROGER JOHNSON, San Clemente

The Southern California Edison claim that there are no credible scenarios for radioactive contamination of our cities and towns is a specious argument. Former Congressman Darrell Issa testified that an accident at San Onofre could shut down I-5 and I-15, close airports, and cause the nation’s two largest ports (Long Beach and Los Angeles) to cease operation.

Writing in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Wall Street analyst David Epstein recently wrote that a nuclear power plant accident could cause the collapse of world financial markets. He added darkly that many experts believe a catastrophe is not a matter of “if” but “when.”

Many wonder if the low-level radiation Edison has been releasing into the ocean and air regularly since 1968 have resulted in cancer streaks here. Cancer is already the No. 1 killer in California, and radiation exposure is especially dangerous for women and children. The National Academy of Sciences wanted to study cancer streaks here, but in 2015 the powerful NRC terminated the research.

We know that San Onofre is vulnerable to terrorist attacks from land, sea, and air, and we also know that nuclear power plants were targets on the short list of 911 terrorists. The industry ignores these threats. The thin canisters Edison uses were never designed to withstand high explosives from truck bombs, missiles or airplane crashes.

Surrounded by public roads, beaches, parking lots and 19 airports, the plant is “defended” only by a few guys with guns. Consider the Israeli LORA missile designed to be concealed inside a standard cargo container. About 12,000 cargo containers pass by every day, and LORA could hit the canisters in 10 minutes.

Nuclear warheads are not needed, since 3.5 million pounds of uranium and plutonium are already here. Remember that it took only 14 pounds of plutonium to destroy Nagasaki. Physicists have calculated that each of the 123 containers could release more deadly Cesium 137 than 1,000 A-bombs.

We have now become a de facto nuclear waste dump for the indefinite future. Where is the public outrage for what is by far the biggest issue for the future of Southern California?

About The Author Staff

comments (1)

  • Outrage?
    Yes.

    The plant leaked every year it was online.
    It was in the papers.its well known.
    The utility said it would not.
    There is plenty of anecdotal evidence of cancer cases in Southwest San Clemente. But the study was never done of longitudinal cancer data. It was blocked because of NRC Politics.

    The canisters are in a location right on the bluff right by the surf right on the fault line . They plan to put ALOT more there! obviously this is a complete travesty. Only a fool supports that location and method. But it’s here. It got here because of a very weak political effort to stop it. When it does Fail, like many hazardous waste dumps do, this particular huge nuclear waste dump will, n a few minutes, make the value of your home zero. That’s the bad news, the good news is though that your home value will only be zero for about 10,000 years.

    I am voting for Jackson Hinkle because he has made a project out of the nuclear waste at San Onofre. He has testified in the US Congress . As a citizen his voice has been heard. This is a huge huge issue. Lets stand up now while we can, no other candidate will do anything about this problem. Hinkle won’t rest.

comments (1)

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>