HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITI...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:22 PM

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION HOLDS PUBLIC FORUM ON PEAKER POWER PLANTS; QUAIL BRUSH OPPONE

February 4, 2013 (San Diego)-- In a public hearing Friday, Public Utilities Commission Representative Denise Tyrrell listened to the concerns of over 500 San Diego citizens regarding three proposed peaker gas-fired power plants, including the Cogentrix and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) plan to develop Quail Brush,near Mission Trails Regional Park. Other proposed plants were Pio Pico in the Otay area and the Wellhead Escondido Energy Center.

Hundreds of citizens wearing bright shirts formed a sea of orange, many rising to speak and urge denial of the Quail Brush application. Blue-shirted members of the Environmental Health Coalition turned out in opposition to all three projects. Residents and other groups from across the county also came to oppose the projects, which collectively drew just a single voice in support.

Pete Hasapopoulus of the Sierra Club asked why San Diego Gas and Electric and Cogentrix, the Applicant, were not present? Former Assemblywoman Lori Saldana suggested that perhaps pressures behind the scenes could explain the absence of SDG&E and Cogentrix. “This is like a game of polo. This is what we see above the water,” she told the CPUC representative, suggesting that what under the water line, the pushing and shoving, is outside of the public’s view.


http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/12380

Suffice it to say, this is a valid news item and current affairs and politics (on steroids) Still, apparently this does not belong on GD never mind the statement on purpose.

Going back to this...the Utility has quite the hubris and they did not show up. We believe, though not stated in the article, that the meeting on Thursday by the CPUC is mostly pro forma and they already made their minds up. Earlier in the process one of the commissioners recommended against approval, but then we had delay after delay.

Yup, Saldaña had it right, the pushing and shoving are happening under the water.

We'll know on Friday morning at the latest.

21 replies, 1748 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION HOLDS PUBLIC FORUM ON PEAKER POWER PLANTS; QUAIL BRUSH OPPONE (Original post)
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 OP
NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #1
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #2
NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #3
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #4
wtmusic Feb 2013 #5
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #6
wtmusic Feb 2013 #7
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #8
wtmusic Feb 2013 #11
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #12
wtmusic Feb 2013 #13
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #14
wtmusic Feb 2013 #15
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #16
wtmusic Feb 2013 #17
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #18
wtmusic Feb 2013 #19
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #20
NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #21
FBaggins Feb 2013 #9
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #10

Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:39 PM

1. I wonder what their reasons are for wanting to build these peaker plants.

Shame that the utility company didn't even show up to answer such questions.


K/R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:25 AM

2. Council member Jack Dale of the Santee City Council





was succinct...profits.

San Diego has installed about 2% of solar capacity, roof top solar. It already replaced San Onofre.

Look at it from the Utility's POV, those are their profits. Why they wanted to charge roof top solar owners for the privilege.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 09:47 AM

3. Energy in CA is highly regulated, the CPUC doesn't let just anything happen.

Profits are capped.

A more likely reason may be that they're going to decommission other older plants, or that these peakers will provide cheaper and possibly cleaner energy than what they're replacing, or if demand is growing then they need to either buy more energy or generate more energy.

Look up "decoupling" as it relates to electric utilities:

Here: http://aceee.org/sector/state-policy/california

http://www.progressivestates.org/blog/672/utility-decoupling-giving-utilities-incentives-to-promote-energy-efficiency#3

http://www.c2es.org/us-states-regions/policy-maps/decoupling/detail

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:25 PM

4. That is the utility's argument

But the evidence shown is that they are not needed, even with bringing plants off line, even with San Onofre off line. Rooftop solar is really taking up quite a bit of the slack.

Why one of the Commissioners recommended against them already.

They are using 2004 data, ...demand due to saving, efficiencies, etcetera is where it was in 2002.

Also they want to transform a state park, open space, and a riparian preserve, into an industrial zone?

I think Dale is correct. Over 20 years, whether the plants are used even 40% of the time or not, we will pay 600 M to the utility. In fact, we are paying for San Onofre, have I mentioned it's off line? There is quite a bit of rights trampling by California utilities and SDG&E is particularly bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:53 PM

5. They've answered those questions.

"At a five-hour hearing Friday June 28, nearly 200 people packed the Planning Commission chambers. Power plant applicant Cogentrix, LLC, a subsidiary of the banking giant Goldman Sachs, initiated a process with the California Energy Commission in August 2011 to license a 100 MW plant that would require eleven 100 foot tall smokestacks on lands that have been designated open space in the East Elliot Community Plan, located just north of Mission Trails Regional Park and adjacent to the park’s expansion area.

SDG&E and Cogentrix have contended that the project is necessary to meet our region’s growing energy demand during peak demand periods, as well as provide backup for desert wind and solar during non-windy conditions or cloudy weather. "

http://eastcountymagazine.org/node/10233

For wind/solar proponents, including the Sierra Club, it just wasn't the answer they wanted to hear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 01:41 PM

6. And a commissioner already recommended against approval

As well as an administrative judge. Which is the answer SDG&E and cogentrix did not want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 01:48 PM

7. Of course

The commissioner is not beholden to SDG&E, and is telling his constituents what they want to hear.

Not saying they're justified in building this plant, but it's all part of the renewables clusterfuck. No one wants to admit that they're useless turds in the desert when they're not providing energy, and something else has to take up the slack.

The price of preserving the grouse, and desert landscape, will be markedly higher utility bills. So much for the myth of cheap renewable power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #7)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:00 PM

8. I am imagining my high utility bill

And among the the highest cost of transmission in the nation.

No, the reason they were told no, is because the plants ARE NOT NEEDED. Power consumption is at 2002 levels, SDG&E is projecting needs from 2004 levels. You know...science and stuff...

They threatened power issues with San Onofre being off line. Guess what? There were zero issues even in the hottest months...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:12 PM

11. That's the reason your bills are so high.

With SO offline, SDG&E is buying from the interstate grid, including Palo Verde nuclear from Arizona. They currently have to pay higher spot prices to balance desert wind and solar, so your bills would go down with new gas generation.

Just pointing out that wind and solar are far from being a value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:41 PM

12. they wete among the highest

Before San Onofre went down. Oh and San Onofre is So Cal Edison. Nice try

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:43 PM

13. I guess I could believe you, or I could believe the San Diego Union-Tribune.

"But a year without nuclear power also has translated into more pollution in Southern California skies and higher utility bills, as natural gas plants fill in for San Onofre. The nuclear shutdown is being used to justify requests for new natural gas power plants in and around the city of San Diego."

http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jan/26/a-year-off-the-grid/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #13)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:46 PM

14. You mean the paper owned by a developer

Who has proven all but bias, who's owner has fired reporters for reporting and has descended into a joke? You mean Doug Manchester's mouth piece?


It's been just about a year since developer and financier Douglas Manchester bought the San Diego Union-Tribune, the largest newspaper in the city. For some staffers and media observers, it's been the worst year in the paper's eight-decade history.

Manchester, a major Republican Party contributor, and U-T CEO John Lynch have overhauled the once-respected daily into what many consider a front for Manchester's "cheerleading" for business interests and right-wing politics.

"People are so embarrassed by the that they are dropping their subscriptions," says Don Bauder, who spent 30 years at the Union-Tribune from 1973 to 2003, which included stints as financial editor and columnist. "Around town it is an embarrassment."

A group headed by Manchester purchased the Union-Tribune in November 2011, just a few years after the paper won two Pulitzer prizes. He took over operations in January 2012 and immediately put his mark on the paper, changing the name to U-T San Diego to promote all of its news outlets beyond print, hiring Lynch, a longtime friend and local radio station owner, as his CEO, and placing a front-page editorial on the print edition that all but vowed to work for big business.


http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/12/06/the-fall-of-the-san-diego-union-tribune/191710

Okie dokie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:54 PM

15. Here's another source, let me know when you're tired.

"Imported energy is more expensive than electricity generated at San Onofre, which had provided about 20% of the power to large swaths of Southern California."

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/22/local/la-me-0823-san-onofre-20120823

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:02 PM

16. And your point?

LA and OC do have that issue. And Southern California Edison is charging it's customers more. That is SoCal Edison.

The rates in San Diego, for the most part, DID NOT go any higher...the market cannot bear it. And the back country lines, like the Sunrise power link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_Powerlink) account for San Diego's rise in utility bills...did I mention this one goes to Arizona?

So you are confusing Orange County and Southern LA County with the San Diego market? You serious? Okie dokie.

This is why San Diego Gas and Electric is trying to stop roof top solar...it is actually threatening the utility's role as a monopoly.

Look, you can cite all the news papers you want. Unlike you, I have sat on many of these lovely, and chiefly complex, hearings. Nothing like six hours of regulatory hearings and four hours of after work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:05 PM

17. And you can blab all you want

You have nothing to back it up, so AFAIC you're just another somebody on the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #17)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:07 PM

18. Yup, you are right

So are you, a perfect nuke loving nobody.

I just cover energy issues in this town for an actual newspaper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:08 PM

19. Must be a hell of a newspaper

that doesn't require sources. Remind me not to subscribe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:12 PM

20. So the Sunrise Power Link goes north?

I am sure the citizens of Boulevard, near where it links with the Comision Federal de Electricidad for the southern most link of the Grid, would be happy to know that.

It does?

Anyway...1.9 B, and power purchase agreements, look that up

http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/the-grid/brown-dedicates-controversial-san-diego-transmission-line.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:29 PM

21. Not surprised. The misinformation and misconceptions around energy projects are astounding.

I'll admit it's a "contention" but not an unreasonable one to have made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:01 PM

9. Locking

This really belongs in General Discussion. Don't you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:04 PM

10. Take it to the bouncer o'er there



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread