Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Pio Pico power plant approved for Otay
"SDG&E is not interested in updating its archaic business models."
Rendering of Pio Pico plant
Environmental health activists on February 6 decried the approval of the Pio Pico power plant by the California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco the day before, saying that the fossil-fuel-burning plant isn't needed and will add much new air pollution.
“Better options exist, but the commission is choosing, once again, to dump a polluting power plant in a low-income community of color that already shoulders a huge burden of pollution from various sources,” says Kayla Race, policy advocate with the Environmental Health Coalition.
“Solar rooftop panels could provide a clean energy solution for everyone, but clearly SDG&E is not interested in updating its archaic business models or protecting customers, otherwise Pio Pico would not even be on the table.”
Construction on the natural-gas-burning plant in Otay Mesa is expected to begin in April, according to Michael P. King, vice president with the Utah-based Apex Power Group, LLC, which owns the plant. They hope to have it operational by September 2015, he said.
In December, community activists rallied for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's public engagement meeting, and dozens of people from the area and from neighborhoods in Tijuana that may likely be affected spoke in opposition. The area around the plant is listed by the state as among the most environmentally compromised 20 percent in the state, largely due to border impacts.
Environmental justice advocates point out that the area is more than 60 percent Latino and that Tijuana residents downwind from the plant have no say in the process.
On February 5, the public utilities commission approved a rate agreement between San Diego Gas & Electric and the Pio Pico plant, the final obstacle to beginning construction.
"Before we flip the switch, we still need the final permit from the EPA," King said in a phone interview. "We expect that to be finalized at the end of the month — it has been approved."
The Pio Pico plant is called a “peaker,” and is designed to be fired up during peak demand hours — in the morning and in the late afternoon-to-evening times, King said. "We can go from cold to full load in ten minutes or less," he said.
SDG&E has agreed to buy 298 megawatts of the power — at rates that the public utilities commission will keep confidential until June 2017. The power costs — estimated by opponents at $1.6 billion over 25 years — will then be passed on to customers "on an equal per kilowatt hour basis by customer class," the CPUC approval says.
The Sierra Club, the Environmental Health Coalition, and the California Environmental Justice Alliance challenged the CPUC application, saying that power could be obtained through cleaner means and a host of procedural objections were dismissed as improper collateral attacks and not considered, according to the decision documents.
Here's something you might be interested in.
Pio Pico power plant approved for Otay
"SDG&E is not interested in updating its archaic business models."
Pio Pico power plant approved for Otay
"SDG&E is not interested in updating its archaic business models."
Rendering of Pio Pico plant
Environmental health activists on February 6 decried the approval of the Pio Pico power plant by the California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco the day before, saying that the fossil-fuel-burning plant isn't needed and will add much new air pollution.
“Better options exist, but the commission is choosing, once again, to dump a polluting power plant in a low-income community of color that already shoulders a huge burden of pollution from various sources,” says Kayla Race, policy advocate with the Environmental Health Coalition.
“Solar rooftop panels could provide a clean energy solution for everyone, but clearly SDG&E is not interested in updating its archaic business models or protecting customers, otherwise Pio Pico would not even be on the table.”
Construction on the natural-gas-burning plant in Otay Mesa is expected to begin in April, according to Michael P. King, vice president with the Utah-based Apex Power Group, LLC, which owns the plant. They hope to have it operational by September 2015, he said.
In December, community activists rallied for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's public engagement meeting, and dozens of people from the area and from neighborhoods in Tijuana that may likely be affected spoke in opposition. The area around the plant is listed by the state as among the most environmentally compromised 20 percent in the state, largely due to border impacts.
Environmental justice advocates point out that the area is more than 60 percent Latino and that Tijuana residents downwind from the plant have no say in the process.
On February 5, the public utilities commission approved a rate agreement between San Diego Gas & Electric and the Pio Pico plant, the final obstacle to beginning construction.
"Before we flip the switch, we still need the final permit from the EPA," King said in a phone interview. "We expect that to be finalized at the end of the month — it has been approved."
The Pio Pico plant is called a “peaker,” and is designed to be fired up during peak demand hours — in the morning and in the late afternoon-to-evening times, King said. "We can go from cold to full load in ten minutes or less," he said.
SDG&E has agreed to buy 298 megawatts of the power — at rates that the public utilities commission will keep confidential until June 2017. The power costs — estimated by opponents at $1.6 billion over 25 years — will then be passed on to customers "on an equal per kilowatt hour basis by customer class," the CPUC approval says.
The Sierra Club, the Environmental Health Coalition, and the California Environmental Justice Alliance challenged the CPUC application, saying that power could be obtained through cleaner means and a host of procedural objections were dismissed as improper collateral attacks and not considered, according to the decision documents.
Comments