Three steps back? California's climate, clean air and consumer cost issues
The Sierra Club has launched an online petition and video urging the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and Governor Jerry Brown to reject a plan that it says would add new air pollution to Southern California and move California's climate goals backward.
 |
| Los Angeles, California. Credit: Hydrogen Iodide/Wikimedia Commons |
The Sierra Club contends that the CPUC, the California Independent System Operator and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have been privately conspiring on a plan that would undo the state's progress on clean air and climate emissions, as well as result in major increases to customer bills.
The recent decision to permanently close the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) raises important questions regarding replacement power, including whether or not there is a need for replacement power and what energy resources, if any, should fulfil this need. Track 4 of the Long-Term Procurement Plan proceeding helps to address these challenges and an answer is expected in January 2014.
However, despite this process, the Sierra Club claims that Governor Brown, CPUC Chairman Michael Peevey, Air Board Chair Mary Nichols, Energy Commissioner Robert Weisenmiller and Water Resources Director Felicia Marcus, working with the CA ISO, have come up with their own proposal and decided that only half the replacement power should come from clean energy. The other half, they propose, should come from new natural gas plants, which the Sierra Club contends would move the state backward on climate, clean air, and consumer costs.
New gas plants would lock in more carbon pollution for decades to come and would undermine California's climate targets. According to the California Air Resources Board, greenhouse gas emissions rose in 2012 for the first time since 2008 because of increased reliance on gas plants after San Onofre closed.
New gas plants will cost utility customers more than $1.3 billion to build, according to the Sierra Club, plus operating costs and new natural gas plant purchases and expenses from decommissioning SONGS that will drive utility bill increases for San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison customers.
"The retirement of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station is a key opportunity to demonstrate how California can meet its future energy needs without new fossil fuel plants. Unfortunately, Governor Brown and state regulators are rushing through a flawed plan and using San Onofre as an excuse to build new polluting gas plants in Southern California," said Evan Gillespie, director of the Sierra Club's My Generation campaign. "We cannot claim to other states and the world that California is leading the charge against climate change while permitting huge new fossil fuel plants in our backyard. That's not leadership. California can either continue to lead on climate protection, or move backwards with new natural gas pollution."
For more:
- see this
report
- see this article
© 2013 FierceMarkets. All rights reserved. http://www.fierceenergy.com