After San Onofre: Enough power, but how clean?Jul 11 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Brian Joseph The Orange County RegisterJuly 11--SACRAMENTO -- Energy officials told a Senate committee Wednesday that the permanent closure of the San Onofre nuclear power plant shouldn't result in a regional or statewide power shortage, but it could undercut affect of the state's environmental goals. Testifying at an informational hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications, representatives of Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, the California Energy Commission, the California Public Utilities Commission and the California Independent System Operator, which provides access to the state's wholesale transmission grid, assured senators that the availability of power in the short term is not a big concern. "There is not a major resource issue or problem in the San Diego basin," said Jim Avery, senior vice president of power supply for San Diego Gas and Electric, which serves part of Orange County. Rather, the hearing evolved into a discussion of the challenges the state now faces in meeting its goals for greenhouse gas reduction and renewable energy resources. Nuclear power does not emit greenhouse gases. Thus, the closure of San Onofre eliminates a substantial source of clean energy, which could be problematic for a state that is trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Sen. Fran Pavely, D-Arguora Hills, one of the co-authors of the legislation behind the state's emission goals, said she does "not want to go backwards" on greenhouse gas emissions. The loss of San Onofre also means the state will have to, at peak times, turn to other power sources, including natural gas, which isn't a renewable energy source. The state has set a goal of serving 33 percent of its retail electricity needs with renewable energy by 2020. Most of the senators appeared to indicate that they thought it was a priority that the energy sources replacing San Onofre be renewable. Sen. Roderick Wright, D-Los Angeles, however, made clear that he thought the state's top priorities should be keeping the lights on and maintaining price stability and "then we can back into the other thing on the greenhouse gas and how much it is and on what capacity and on what to use." Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Pacoima, the chairman of the committee, was quick to challenge Wright's premise, saying, "Conceptually, I don't think keeping the lights on and reducing emissions are contradictory. I don't think keeping the lights on and integrating ... renewables are mutually exclusive." The committee came to no conclusions Wednesday, but vowed to continue monitoring the closure's impact in subsequent hearings scheduled for August and September. The hearing also revealed that nuclear materials are expected to be housed at the San Onofre site for at least another decade if not longer and that Southern California Edison intends to reduce the plant's workforce from about 1,500 to 600 in September, and eventually down to 400. Only five state legislators participated in Wednesday's hearing. None was Republican and none was from Orange or San Diego counties. http://www.energycentral.com/functional/news/news_detail.cfm?did=29267574 |