Mark, I agree it would be great if officials with the CPUC, CEC, or CAISO would go on the record as supporting Diablo Canyon extended operations. Supporting DCPP extended operations would be the logical action. Regrettably, during the past decade, those bureaucracies have taken many actions adverse to Diablo Canyon extended operations. CGNP has reported on their adverse actions at the CGNP website https://CGNP.org and for more than two years via this GreenNUKE Substack.
Thanks for the update Gene.
It would great if one of the CEC commissioners, or PUC leaders, would go on record as supporting the continued operation of facility.
I noticed that CAISO has updated their breakdown of cost allocations in their Prices data-
https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook/prices
the greenhouse gas allocation is a new category.
Example-
PHILO_6_N001
Type: LOAD
Region: ISO
05/05/2026
Hour: 3-4
Locational Marginal Price (LMP)−$17.31
Price Breakdown
Congestion
−$43.92
Greenhouse gas
$0.00
Loss
$0.44
Marginal energy cost
$26.18
it sounds like the move to clean energy accounting (vs RE/C) accounting is moving forward.
Mark, I agree it would be great if officials with the CPUC, CEC, or CAISO would go on the record as supporting Diablo Canyon extended operations. Supporting DCPP extended operations would be the logical action. Regrettably, during the past decade, those bureaucracies have taken many actions adverse to Diablo Canyon extended operations. CGNP has reported on their adverse actions at the CGNP website https://CGNP.org and for more than two years via this GreenNUKE Substack.