No Surprises on Sunrise: The Opposition is Still Emotional, but the Need for the Line is Real

I don't expect to see anything new this week as the hearings continue on the Sunrise Powerlink. None at all... I expect that the opposition will show up with their emotional arguments that are based mostly on emotion and very little on facts. I expect that the proponents will show up with sound and reasoned arguments. And while they may be vague on the exact route, the facts will be strong on the need to build this project.

In this blog, I have discussed my views on this project - do we need it? Most definitely. A growing part of the state should not have such a deficiency in transmission. Should all of the generation that the line is scheduled to potentially bring come from green resources? Ok, this point can be debated, but I say no. Why? Well, green is not totally dependable. You see ambient temperature drives wind, so when the days are hot - no wind. When the days are cloudy, no sun - ergo no solar energy.

On those days, you need to have dependable back-up generation that can start on a moments notice. This will be generation fueled by clean burning natural gas. SDG&E has been careful not to talk about this - I don't blame them. But I think they should. In so doing they could come clean with this issue and put it to rest. They might further state that they would secure that bit of generation (however much it is) through a competitive solicitation that will only consider state-of-the art generation - thus keeping the potential impact to the environment to a minimum. I am sure they will do just that at some point.

The realities are simple. The region is growing and a growing area has power needs that cannot be met by conservation alone - we the actual users have proven that we would rather not bake when the temperatures go up - and that we would rather not be inconvenienced by having to try to wake up to o laundry or any other energy intensive using task at 3 in the morning. No, we want our power when we want to use it and we don't want to hear excuses.

So, consider the following when you read the stories this week about the Sunrise Powerlink hearings: Want to be comfortable when it's hot? Want to do laundry and run the dishwasher and dryer or pool and spa whenever you want to? Stop complaining and support the Sunrise Powerlink. It's really that simple, the infrastructure is lacking, and we need to build it.

Comments

[Lhogue]

So Bill Powers is emotional? He has decades in the energy industry as an engineer. Read his report at www.etechinternational.org. It has the real green energy solution for San Diego's power needs.

Michael Shames of the Utility Consumers Action Network is emotional? He is highly respected by the Public Utilities Commission. Read his proposed energy infrastructure alternative and the reasons why the Sunrise Powerlink is not the best solution for San Diego at www.ucan.org/energy/home.

Yes, it's the infrastructure, stupid. But we need smart infrastructure, not stupid infrastructure like the Sunrise Powerlink.

By the way, your average person actually enjoys parks without infrastructure running through them. If that's "emotional," is that a bad thing?

[Jesus Arredondo]

"Yes, it's the infrastructure, stupid. But we need smart infrastructure, not stupid infrastructure like the Sunrise Powerlink."

Former Governor Jerry Brown (now California's AG) and his then Chief of Staff ousted former Governor Gray Davis once believed and made it the policy of that Administration that the "right" infrastructure was not building infrastructure. They honestly believed that if we didn't build it, people would not come to California. Oops! That was stupid.

When Gray Davis became governor, he struggled to make up his mind on what to do about the electricity infrastructure as the whole thing was falling down -- indecision on doing the "right" thing for the infrastructure cost him his job. Oops! That was stupid.

You would think folks would learn from the past... maybe not.