Printer-friendly version
Source: Public Watchdogs
Photo: recently as 1881, the coastline from Northern Orange County to Central San Diego County was officially known as “Earthquake Bay.”
February 16, 2017 (San Diego) -- A public advocate and a geologist are singing a sour note over the publicly funded $64 Million study of earthquake risks at SONGS, the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.
The study, which appears to assert that the beach is a safe location for the construction of what will be the largest privately owned nuclear waste dump in the USA, has the consumer group Public Watchdogs all shook up.
According to executive director, Charles Langley, "Ratepayers should be quaking in rage at the cost of this ridiculous $64 million study."
Robert Pope, the Public Watchdogs' Geologist says that in his opinion, the studies are "faulty." According to Pope "the study delivered an abundance of data, but the conclusions are faulty."
The studies, which were made public three days ago on Southern California Edison's Website were the subject of tonight’s Southern California Edison Community Engagement meeting in Dana Point.
Curiously, Edison's costly report identifies "preferred conclusions," suggesting that there other alternative conclusions that were ignored. According to Pope, "I've never seen an alternative 'preferred conclusion' used in a scientific papers. It is unusual and
suggests that the authors may have had other conclusions that were redacted from the final report."
In addition to the "preferred conclusions," one of the reports mentions that it was edited by two "anonymous" individuals.
"We're' skeptical," says Langley, "and look forward to hearing Southern California Edison's explanation at its Community Engagement Panel meeting this evening."
A copy of Public Watchdogs' response to the Edison report is available at www.publicwatchdogs.org
Recent comments