Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant: The WikiBook/Intro

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Introduction to the Fukushima Aftermath series at Wikibooks[edit | edit source]

This text book is part of a planned cirriculum at Wikiversity and is the pilot for an intended series of localized textbooks focused upon problematic nuclear power plants in the English speaking world. This series is conceived as a series, and may even grow into an "imprint" of Wikibooks. The purpose of the Fukushima Aftermath series is to provide a modality for collective intelligence (brainstorming) pursuant to setting nuclear energy policy.

This textbook in particular is of course focused on the Diablo Canyon (Nuclear) Power Plant, which is officially termed the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP). However, the policy of the Fukushima Aftermath imprint is consistent with the general "wiki way" which has a well-established policy of maintaining a neutral point of view NPOV. The San Luis Obispo Sierra Club [1] has gone on record opposing the terminology "Power Plant", and has insisted publicly that it is a Nuclear Power Plant and that it should be referred to as such. In order to maintain NPOV, the Fukushima Aftermath Manual of Style suggests avoiding either term until there has been a full and final consensus as to which designation, if either, is most proper. Thus, the plant may be referred to as "the plant", "the facility", or, simply, "Diablo". A useful writing technique is to specify the parts thereof; accordingly: the "reactor", the "spent fuel storage tanks", the PG&E property, etc.

Goals[edit | edit source]

The goals of the Fukushima Aftermath series is not to predetermine or influence nuclear policy one way or another, but rather to provide a comprehensive resource for information, philosophical development, investigative strategy and development of community participation in the broadest sense to include the various scientific and humanistic disciplines as well as consumers, agriculture, industry and labor.

What this book teaches[edit | edit source]

Topics[edit | edit source]

This book covers rudimenary nuclear physics and includes the geology and civil engineering aspects of construction on earthquake-prone sites. An additional topic area is the regulatory and political environment of nuclear energy and the legal processes by which citizens may participate in policy deliberations. Creative methods of influencing public policy are outside the scope of these topics, although a historical account of such matters as the Abalone Alliance and public demonstrations for or against the facility are pertinent. Most importantly, the book aims to teach methods of learning collaboratively through participation in the ongoing updating of this book.

Who the audience is[edit | edit source]

This series is structured to be useful to anyone who is concerned about potential economic, environmental,health and safety consequences of public policy decisions regarding Diablo Canyon. This includes students and professionals in the fields of environmental law, nuclear engineering, public relations, public policy and government. It also can be used by studious ordinary citizens, farmers, vintners, residents, employees of Pacific Gas and Electric and its contractors, as well as members of city and county government in South Central California. Ultimately, this book may be integrated into a course structure at an educational institution such as UCSB,California Polytechnic, an honors high school cirricula, or at Wikiversity, such as [Government and Citizen Participation|California Government and Citizen Participation], or a new, nuclear -specific course which perhaps you would like to develop.

Level of science material[edit | edit source]

The series aims to teach only the very basic concepts of related science , only the minimal baseline which is required in order to understand nuclear energy policy debates. Thus the level of material in this textbook should remain accessible to non-science majors including community college students, high school upper class students and adult education classes. We would like to see a simplified version developed for Wikibooks Jr, which could be adapted for adult learners at wikiversity.

Scoping[edit | edit source]

Scoping is the process of determining how broad of a topic will be covered by a given collaborative process. It is a more important part of complex policy determinations which involve the interests of many parties and thus is particularly important in contending with nuclear impact public safety and related matters. Certainly alternative energy options are related but outside any reasonable scope of this book; there may be a role for a separate book, or series, as part of the Wikibooks/Fukushima Aftermath imprint. Clearly, the basic physical and biological sciences belong in the scope of the book. This should include weather a to the extent that they impact both the potential distribution pattern of dispersed radionuclides. A cursory review of climatology is relevant only to the extent it impacts the broader policy decision of how much weight should be given to nuclear in the overall energy portfolio of the national and global economies; a more expanded treatment belongs in either a separate book or in a more generalized book which would be designed for use by all of the Facility-specific readership/editing community. The requirements and style of such a book would be more readily apparent only after one or more facility-specific books have been substantially completed. For instance, a second book, using many of the chapters of this book, might be developed with a specific focus on the SONGS Nuclear Generating Station in San Diego. After completion of that book, it would be appropriate for the editing community to discuss splitting some of the Basic Science chapters into a separate book,leaving only short summary treatment intact in each Facility-specific book.

About this book's neutral point of view policy[edit | edit source]

This book is a collaborative undertaking of Wikibooks, a project of the Wikimedia Foundation. "Open books for an open world." As such, anyone is entitled to edit it in accordance with the spirit and specification of open publishing policy as consistent with the particular traditions, precedents and intentions specific to Wikibooks. Among these is the concept of neutral point of view, and, consistent with that custom, every effort is made to keep this book, FA:DNR? as free of bias, ideology, agenda and interpersonal pathology as possible. Respect, even for persons with whom one disagrees, is the paramount ingredient which we hope will make this book an invaluable reference tool as well as an enjoyable read. If this book is successful, subsequent books in a series may apply its best practice to an evaluation of the SONGS Nuclear Generating Station in San Diego, a more generalized "Fukushima Aftermath" imprint, and a version available in simple plain English, and possible translations. Remember, a WikiBook is a living breathing document which should always be updating and modifying itself to reflect changing consensus. You are not just a reader, you are invited to be a co-writer, at any time you may so wish.

Scoping and neutral point of view[edit | edit source]

Note that determinations of scope have an impact on what is and is not admissible. Some content, deemed admissible, may weigh in favor of one point of view or another. Thus, determinations of scope may predetermine which point of view triumphs in the war of ideas. Not that WikiBooks has a decidely brief NPOV policy, but manages to include the following, which problematizes the foregoing:

  • books written from a neutral point of view represent differing views on a subject fairly within the book's scope (in other words, if the scope is mainstream views of physics, than competing mainstream views can and should be presented, but non-mainstream views are almost always irrelevant.

A final point with regard to scoping is that scoping is a term of art in the process of environmental approvals. Most processes under the California Environmental Quality Act which require an Environmental Impact Statement have a separate public hearing stage for scoping.

References[edit | edit source]