REGION: SDG&E threatened with suit over green energy
Utility says it is aggressively pursuing contracts from power entrepreneurs
By DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | ∞
San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre threatened Tuesday to sue the region's dominant utility if it fails to meet a state mandate to generate one-fifth of its power from sources such as the sun and wind by 2010.
Aguirre said he will file suit by early next year if San Diego Gas & Electric Co. doesn't make major strides toward achieving the goal, primarily through promoting development of solar rooftop panels on large business and public buildings in San Diego County.
"We're definitely not going to wait until 2010," Aguirre said during a telephone interview. "If significant progress is not made by December, there will be litigation."
The suit would cite failure to comply with state law, thereby a breach of SDG&E's franchise to serve power to customers in the city of San Diego, he said, adding he wants to spur compliance with the law.
"San Diego Gas & Electric's effort ... has been incomplete at best and intentionally compromised at worst," Aguirre said in a report he unveiled at a news conference Tuesday in San Diego.
SDG&E sharply disputed Aguirre's characterization.
In a prepared statement, company officials said: "SDG&E is aggressively pursuing renewable energy sources whether they are inside or outside our region. Today, we are more than three-quarters of the way toward meeting the state's 20 percent renewable-energy goal by 2010. And, in 2011, we currently have 21 percent of our energy supply under contract with renewable resources."
But the company said a transmission line will be required to bring in power from outside the region to serve its 3.5 million customers in San Diego County and southern Orange County.
"If he (Aguirre) truly is serious about meeting the renewable goals for San Diego, he should stop his press conferences and finger-pointing and, instead, work with us in permitting necessary new transmission lines," the statement said.
SDG&E now derives 6 percent of its electricity from green sources, up from 1 percent in 2000. Utility officials have acknowledged they are unlikely to meet the 2010 deadline because they were counting on their proposed $1.5 billion Sunrise Powerlink being ready. The earliest it could now be ready if approved and built is 2011.
Sunrise Powerlink is a 150-mile-long high-voltage line that would run from El Centro to Carmel Valley, crossing Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, Santa Ysabel, Ramona and Rancho Penasquitos. The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to decide by year's end whether to approve the project.
The commission is also responsible for enforcing the green power law. Agency officials have indicated they intend to begin enforcing the law in 2010, and will determine whether to issue penalties based on how much effort utilities have made.
Utilities that miss the deadline could be fined up to $25 million a year. State lawmakers, however, recently passed legislation giving regulators the option of waiving penalties if the lack of a power line is the reason green power can't be delivered.
SDG&E isn't the only utility that may miss the goal.
Southern California Edison, the nation's leader in production of green energy with 16 percent of its power coming from clean sources, also could fall short of 20 percent by 2010.
"There is some question whether we will get it all delivered by 2010," said Gil Alexander, spokesman for the huge utility that serves much of Southern California outside of San Diego, including Riverside County.
Like SDG&E, Edison is looking to the sun-drenched, wind-blown desert regions to provide much of its clean energy while also developing the nation's largest rooftop solar project.
"Renewable-rich areas are remote areas where there are no customers," Alexander said, in a telephone interview Tuesday afternoon. "The link is transmission and it is not an overnight proposition."
Alexander said Edison is building several sets of high-voltage lines that, when completed, will be capable of delivering 4,500 megawatts of wind and sun power from the Tehachapi Mountain region north of Los Angeles. That's as much as San Diego County uses on the hottest day of the year.
Some of those lines will be ready by 2010, he said, but others could take longer to bring on-line.
Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 745-6611, Ext. 2623, or ddowney@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Burt wrote on Jul 8, 2008 10:35 PM:San Diego has sun like other places have oil. Maybe we can use a powerlink someday…but Local Solar should get the first attention. The sun is already here, and so is the technology to harvest it. The best news of all for a sustainable Local Solar approach is that it starts solving a problem now that the human race is going to have to solve sometime, and that is learning how to live when oil gets too expensive to burn.
Local wrote on Jul 9, 2008 4:27 AM:Our abundance of sun enrgy is being diverted to health concerns. There is $ to be made in keeping sun off people. Can it also be used for energy? Let us reinvent the wheel. Tap it for energy and keep it off people. DOH! NAh! It makes too much sense.
We are going to sue wrote on Jul 9, 2008 6:10 AM:Aguirre, practicing stupidity without a license.
Build it.... wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:01 AM:here, there are acres and acres of open space on top of large commercial buildings and schools on which they could be putting up these photo-voltaic
systems and tieing them into the grid via existing meter connections, no additional high voltage lines strung across the desert would be required, and the panels would absorb heat that would otherwise be absorbed into the roof's of the building they are mounted to, there by helping to keep the occupancies underneath these systems cooler too
John E wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:39 AM:If SDG&E were serious about solar energy, they would do a more equitable job of paying owners of solar voltaic systems for their excess electricity, which is often generated when it does the most good, during peak load periods.
If an electro magnetic wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:39 AM:bomb burst occured over the US, can these devices run independant to any computer system?
Bill One wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:44 AM:Quess what people, this means our electric bills will be going much higher than the already are. Now lets suppose they build a huge solar or wind farm. What do you think the chances of the enviro-nuts letting a power link to be built?
Bill One wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:49 AM:To Build It. Your idea on the surface seems like a good common sense idea. But most comercial roofs simply wouldn't support the weight of that many panels. So it would require acres and acres of buildings being re-engineered and rebuilt. The power lines accross the desert would be much less expensive and in reality no impact on the desert.
Paul wrote on Jul 9, 2008 8:34 AM:Germany is way ahead of us in solar panel generation, and there it's not exactly a sunshine place. KPBS had a program showing a pig farmer now a solar panel farmer. But when I put solar panels on the house, there is a limit to what you can do, because of some stupid regulation that any excess power that you don't use, goes back to the grid without credit. And I don't understand why we need transmission lines out to the desert. There are plenty of sunny slopes here in the county.
Right on wrote on Jul 9, 2008 9:04 AM:Aguirre is right to demand green power. SDG&E is mandated to provide it. They are reluctant to buy back power on the grid that solar produces. It's all about money folks. They won't do it unless they can make a killing in billing the consumer. Listen to Paul and how Germany and most of Europe is taking advantage of solar power. We are like dinosaurs here...waiting for offshore drilling. Stupid.
JSten wrote on Jul 9, 2008 9:06 AM:Any large project will require an environmental impact study. Lets see, how do you weigh the benefits of a large solar array against impacts on the gnatcatcher habitat? Or the desert tortoise, or any of the other endangered mice, birds, lizards, amoeba or other creatures impacted by installation of shade (which a solar panel really is)
Also Bill One is correct when he recognizes the impact on a structure by the addition of weight due to any new equipment on a rooftop. A structural analysis needs to be done to ensure tha tthe additional load does not add structureal load or change seismic response.
Finally, making a building energy independent should be enough. People keep chasing this dream that Sempra is like an old timey oil company and solar panels are their personal oil well. Well the suits have gotten more stingy lately, and the best thing to do is to put THEM on a interruptable basis. At the least, they will be shaving peak loads, and the owner will be saving on electricity bills.
Helios wrote on Jul 9, 2008 9:28 AM:Last time I checked the return on investment for solar on my house was about 5% after rebates and incentives.
I can find better places to invest my money than in a solar photovoltaic rooftop.
The economics of electric generation favor larger scale projects. Putting it on your house does not make economic sense.
Putting it in a desert area where it can be concentrated makes more sense.
Putting it on a hillside in SD county might make sense. Putting it in parking lots like Kyocera might also make sense... but I won't pay $30,000 to put it on my roof and then get a measely 5% return on my money...???
I agree w Helios wrote on Jul 9, 2008 1:01 PM:Solar power locally costs too much and the sun isn't as consistent in SD (marine layer in the mornings) vs. imperial valley (hot all day). The cost for a million little rooftops is greater than one big solar unit and a transmission line. The maintenance would be cheaper too at one place vs. having to go to all these little locations (and we will end up paying for the transportation (gas) in our bills). SDG&E is doing the right thing. Aguirre is all about political grandstanding and no common sense.
Laura wrote on Jul 10, 2008 9:50 PM:We do NOT need a power line through our beautiful back country and protected natural parks to get more energy! That is not only a deceiving line of thought, it is a backward technology (using imported fossil fuels)that touts clean energy to fool us into buying it. We KNOW there are better ways to generate more "clean" energy locally, such as the San Diego Smart Energy 2020 plan, which is also more cost effective for tax payers. Please think of the value of beautiful open spaces. Don't litter the sky.
fuelcell friend wrote on Jul 13, 2008 4:57 PM:I think that SDG&E is like all the rest of the corporations, if they don't get big returns for there stock holders, they don't want to do it. Yes they do want to pass the cost to their customers. What about hydrogen fuel cell energy?? Why do we not hear anything about that clean energy system that the by product is water, and guess what Honda has not only a hydrogen fuel cell car available, but a home energy station as well! Which can not only fuel your car but run electricity. It is available in Irvine, in fact UC Irvine has a hydrogen fueling station run by solar power!!! Not only can you fuel your car, but heat and provide electricty for your home and the by product is water, so you can do drip irrigation for your lawn and plants, talk about a win win situation!!! Where is the news media when these safe green energy options exist NOW! Also Governor Schwartzeneger has a proposal of a Hydrogen highway planned where is the news on that! (Hydrogen fuel stations throughout California) We are not addictied to oil, we are not give a choice and the Oil Companies and energy companies like making big bucks off their customers and keeping the monopoly to themselves. Plug Inc makes home energy stations, we need to step up technology and bring it to the public! Stop the energy Nazis from controlling our lives!
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