How You Can Help Protect Diablo Canyon Power Plant
Contact your California State Senator to Oppose SB 540 (Becker, 2025)
Californians for Green Nuclear Power (CGNP) believes that CAISO grid regionalization such as proposed by SB 540 (Becker, 2025) would provide Warren Buffett’s PacifiCorp with an indirect pathway to needlessly close Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP,) substantially boosting PacifiCorp’s profits. SB 540 is Warren’s latest legislative vehicle. We believe this is his sixth attempt since the unanimous 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision Hughes v Talen Energy. There must be a large financial gain for him to be making such a protracted effort.
With Diablo Canyon closed, California will have no choice but to import even larger amounts of coal-fired power from their roughly 6,000 MW coal-fired fleet. One of the factors is the power engineering requirement that California’s electric power grid maintain sufficient synchronous grid inertia (SGI.) DCPP produces by far the greatest amount of SGI from any power generation plant in California. A collection of coal-fired power plants in and around Wyoming could provide the replacement SGI, connected by a long-distance power transmission network known as PacifiCorp’s Energy Gateway.
For details, see CGNP’s February 21, 2025 article, “A sneaky, indirect plan that could shut down Diablo Canyon by out-of-state coal interests - Diablo Canyon should power California's future instead of Wyoming coal”
A sneaky, indirect plan that could shut down Diablo Canyon by out-of-state coal interests
GreenNUKE is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Starting in 2024, CGNP has worked tirelessly to educate California legislators to the risk of CAISO grid regionalization. We are gratified to learn that nonprofits such as Consumer Watchdog, and the Center for Biological Diversity have opposed SB 540. Particularly notable is the opposition testimony of former CPUC Chair Loretta Lynch. “The ghost in the grid,” By BLANCA BEGERT, Politico, 04/21/2025 08:58 PM EDT
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-climate/2025/04/21/the-ghost-in-the-grid-00302282
……. But ratepayer advocates, the Center for Biological Diversity and other labor groups are still arguing that turning over control of California’s energy markets to a yet-to-be-developed regional board would jeopardize the state’s ability to control its own energy prices and grid emissions.
They also have a secret weapon in their corner — Loretta Lynch, a particularly vocal former California Public Utilities Commission president who is invoking the ghost of the California energy crisis to argue that ceding control of the energy markets could lead to runaway prices.
“I am doing this as a citizen of California to sound the clarion call that this will create a new ability for the sons of Enron to pillage California yet again,” Lynch, who served during the crisis, said in an interview Friday.
Lynch makes the case that SB 540, in allowing California to cede control of its electricity markets to a new regional body, removes them from the state law’s requirement that they be run in a manner that minimizes cost and maximizes availability of energy. She also argues that expanding the market could open California to an interstate commerce clause lawsuit that would force it to import coal-powered electricity — and that all of this is more likely under Trump’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ……..
In 2024, we provided oral testimony in a pair of Sacramento hearings regarding California power reliability. We’ve sent a steady stream of emails to California decision makers. Starting about a month ago, CGNP testified in opposition to SB 540 at a trio of California Senate committee hearings. During those three recent visits, CGNP made over 100 Sacramento legislative office visits to drop off information sheets and discuss the harmful aspects of SB 540 with legislative staffers. Many staffers were surprised with the SB 540 opposition information we provided to them. As you will note below, Warren Buffett’s PacifiCorp was the number 3 California lobbyist in 2024.
A couple of nights ago, we pulled an “all nighter” to send out 40 personalized emails to the best emails we could obtain for each California Senator.. Here’s the text of the message to SB 540’s primary sponsor:
June 3, 2025
The Honorable Senator Josh Becker
OPPOSE SB 540 (Becker, 2025)
Dear Senator Becker:
Independent nonprofit Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Inc. (CGNP) recently visited your Sacramento office multiple times to deliver our opposition messages regarding SB 540. Our summary is that this bill establishes the necessary condition, namely the independent multistate board that would eventually determine many dimensions of California energy policy, aka CAISO grid regionalization. To further summarize, we reiterate our April 29, 2025 two -word opposition speech before the California Judiciary Committee, "Federal preemption."
CGNP opposes the export of more power to California from the 2,441 MW Jim Bridger Power Plant - one of PacifiCorp's Wyoming coal-fired generation plants.
CGNP will be obtaining the above June 10, 1971 commemorative coin . The front of the coin includes the legend, "Energy from western coal."
CGNP has assembled considerable information supporting the perspective the main purpose of Warren Buffett's PacifiCorp expending over $14.3 million as the number three California lobbyist in 2024 is to expand their already large business of selling mostly coal-fired power at wholesale to California.
We've shown that PacifiCorp has already sold almost a billion dollars of this power to California since November, 2014.
In light of numerous irregularities found in PacifiCorp's 2024 mandatory Form 635 quarterly filings, CGNP filed a complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission.
CGNP urges a NO vote on SB 540 during the Senate floor vote on or before June 6, 2025.
CGNP is urging interested readers to send their own opposition messages tonight to their California state Senator. Even a single sentence opposing SB 540 would be helpful. The official “Find Your California Representative” link at
https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/
will show your state Assembly member and your state Senator. Clicking on the Senator’s link will bring you to their official state website, where you may email them a short SB 540 opposition message. (Please, no more than a paragraph.)
I will provide updates in the comments as I learn about them.
At 11:36 PM PDT on Wednesday, June 4, 2025
Challenging news, likely demonstrating the effectiveness of PacifiCorp spending more than $14.3 million lobbying in 2024.....
SB-540: Independent System Operator: independent regional organization: California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program.
On 04-JUN-25 the following history action was applied:
In the initial vote, there were 33 votes in favor and one no vote. There was a motion to reconsider, yielding three more yes votes and a lack of no votes.
"Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0.) Ordered to the Assembly." (That means four California Senators chose not to vote.)
DCPP advocates have their work cut out for them to stop SB 540 in the Assembly.
In 2024, Governor Newsom signaled his support at the WIEB "Pathways" website via the CPUC's PAO on May 8, 2024. https://www.westernenergyboard.org/wp-content/uploads/Public-Advocates-Office-Comments-on-WWGPI-Phase-1-Straw-Proposal.pdf .
Here's CGNP's May 8, 2024 opposition comments: https://www.westernenergyboard.org/wp-content/uploads/22.-Californians-for-Green-Nuclear-Power_Oppose-the-West-Wide-Governance-Pathways-Initiative-_WWGPI_-05-08-24.pdf
Here's RTO Insider's reporting. (RTO Insider is an expensive specialty publication. As a consequence of lack of funds, CGNP had to drop our subscription.) Here's Google's summary. (CGNP would appreciate a copy of this article if available.)
During the 45-minute floor debate on California Senate Bill 540, several senators expressed concerns about the extensive amendments to the bill.
Here are some of the key concerns raised during the debate:
The creation of a "Regional Energy Market Oversight Council," tasked with ensuring CAISO's participation in a regional energy market benefits California's interests, was a point of concern.
Senators worried about the potential threat to California's clean energy policies if CAISO joined a regional market, particularly in light of federal policies supporting coal power.
Some senators sought commitments to revert the bill closer to its original state through future amendments.
Others stressed the importance of an "off-ramp" mechanism allowing California to exit the regional market if needed.
In essence, the debate focused on how the bill's changes might affect California's control over its energy policies and the role of the new oversight council in protecting the state's interests.