More challenges leveled at power line
By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | ∞
NORTH COUNTY -- Electricity would be less expensive for area ratepayers if San Diego Gas & Electric Co. chose to rely on new natural-gas-fired power plants in metro San Diego rather than build a power line through the backcountry, according to an analysis by a utility competitor.
In filing a report Friday on behalf of Dynegy, Inc., the company that wants to replace the aging South Bay power plant in Chula Vista with a modern one nearby, an official said generating plants can be built faster than transmission lines, and without the energy loss that occurs when electricity is transported long distances over wires.
"The most effective way to serve electric demand is to locate the supply close to the load," said Ali Amirali, managing director for regulatory policy and transmission for Dynegy in Sacramento.
San Diego Gas & Electric disputed the notion that local plants would be more economical than long-distance wires.
Amirali's comments came in a report filed in connection with San Diego Gas & Electric's proposed $1.3 billion Sunrise Powerlink transmission line, which would run 150 miles from El Centro to Carmel Valley. Featuring thick wires strung from steel towers up to 150 feet tall, the project would wind through Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, Santa Ysabel, Ramona and Rancho Penasquitos.
The reports, called testimony, help set the stage for California Public Utilities Commission hearings on the need for the line starting July 9 in San Diego. The commission is scheduled to decide whether to issue a permit for the line in January.
Scott Crider, public affairs manager for the Sunrise Powerlink, said, "It's no surprise that energy companies that want to build fossil fuel power plants in San Diego County are going to oppose a transmission line that is going to deliver renewable power from Imperial Valley."
Besides shoring up the region's electricity supplies, the Sunrise power line is being sold on the premise that it would plug San Diego County into the solar and geothermal power in Imperial Valley, helping the region comply with a state mandate to secure 20 percent of its supplies from non-fossil-fuel sources.
"What they're looking to do is to commit our customers to a local-generation-only strategy," Crider said. "And that will commit our customers to a fossil-fuel future and limit our ability to increase the use of green energy."
As for the specific charge that the line would be more costly, Crider said "the experts simply don't agree."
He cited a study by the California Independent System Operator last summer that concluded the line would be the most efficient way to meet future electricity needs.
The line is sharply opposed by environmentalists and communities along the preferred route.
In other testimony Friday, Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation, stated that building the power line through the 600,000-acre Anza-Borrego Desert State Park would establish a "dangerous" trend that could undermine one of the nation's most extensive state park systems. She urged the state to reject the project, or order a route around the park.
"The new transmission lines will be visible from great distances," she said.
Goldstein said the proposed 140 towers in the park would require construction of 140 new spur roads that, besides providing utility workers access to the line for repairs, would subject pristine areas and archaeological sites to vandalism.
Crider said the foundation's objections "are really outside the scope of where we are at right now" and will be addressed in an environmental study released later this summer.
In testimony on behalf of the Ramona community group Mussey Grade Alliance, consultant Joseph Mitchell stated that based on historical fire trends in California the Sunrise Powerlink could be expected to ignite a wildfire every 20 years.
Crider said the utility will analyze that estimate.
Generally speaking, he said, "high-voltage transmission lines like Sunrise represent a very low fire risk to the region." Crider said the steel towers don't catch on fire and are built to withstand strong wind.
On June 15, the utility is scheduled to submit testimony rebutting reports filed Friday.
-- Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 740-5442 or ddowney@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
remember wrote on Jun 5, 2007 6:12 AM:IT is simple. Sunrise Powerlink does not fit the county's energy plan. What is wrong with that plan and why are only a few of the plan adopters speaking out against SDG&E? Are they scared?
Best way to locally generate wrote on Jun 5, 2007 7:23 AM:Get solar on your house. I just installed a 3kw system, out of pocket cost $12,000. I am generating on average 15kwh day, and that is during this june gloom overcast skys, 12 blocks from the beach. Power is going to get expensive over the next 20 years and a lot of homeowners are going to wish they made the move to solar.
Bruce wrote on Jun 6, 2007 8:53 AM:Question for "remember": Exactly who would spend more time and resources on the county's energy plan than SDGE? "Best way to locally generate" put his money where his mouth is and took constructive action. That is more productive than "remember" complaining that somebody else hasn't solved his grievance.
BG wrote on Jun 6, 2007 8:58 AM:Question for "remember": Exactly who would spend more time and resources on the county's energy plan than SDGE? "Best way to locally generate" put his money where his mouth is and took constructive action. That is more productive than "remember" complaining that somebody else hasn't solved his grievance.
Greenie wrote on Jun 6, 2007 2:18 PM:I don't want more fossil generation in our air basin than is minimally necessary. We'll never meet the 20% remnewable target w/o access to Imperial's solar potential. The line was there before the park was established. Small price to pay for improved access to green power. The line also provides b'up for the only other 500kV line to the east. You'll change your mind if that line burns down and there's no backup.
James W. wrote on Jun 6, 2007 4:15 PM:I found your June 4 article, "More Charges leveled at Power Line? to be absolutely pathetic reporting. This article, with slim exception, uncritically parrots the Sempra/SDG&E designated spokesman's pablum about how great this latest public scam and treasury heist ("Sunrise PowerLink") would be for San Diego and Southern California. This is the same outfit, Sempra Inc., who was Enron's regional partner in the natural gas price-fixing scenario that played the lead role in bankrupting the California state treasury, several years ago (see [Web site]). These same clowns and ... have repeatedly touted the presumed renewable/?green? aspect of PowerLink, which will be minimal. If they were concerned about the environment or renewability, we would instead have scaleable in-basin generation supplemented by distributed renewable solutions (including photovoltaics). Reality is that they're looking to generate cheap power in Baja using fossil fuels, minimally supplemented by renewables, destroy the pristine beauty of the San Diego backcountry and parks with their unsightly transmission towers - while offloading investment risk and cost on you, the "ratepayer" public. This plan is effectively a needless Mexico-to-LA Victorian-era power shot across our own backyards, designed to maximize Sempra profits versus public benefit, as always; yet, you'd never know that from your June 4th article. For the benefit of your readers, I would like to recommend the following non-profit sources of information regarding PowerLink: [Web site], [Web site], [Web site] and [Web site]. Please, in the future, try to do a more comprehensive and balanced job of reporting on an issue of such major public importance. Regards, James W...
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement