Keep up with UCAN.org by following us on Twitter!
Thanks for visiting UCAN.org! Please remember our services are available because of grassroots donations from people like you. Please help us continue our work with a donation of any amount. Click here to visit our secure donation page.
The first day of hearings were spent by a morning of "opening arguments" by the various parties in this case. The afternoon involved the cross examination of James Avery, senior vice-president for electric transmission at SDG&E.
The opening statements were a recapitulation of the parties' position. SDG&E provided a handout recounting the "benefits" of Sunrise. But embedded in the handout were some of the more damning elements of Sunrise. SDG&E touted Sunrise reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But then I pointed out and Commissioner Grueneich seized on the fact that SDG&E's modeling for Sunrise shows that the Southwest could import an additional 1000 MW (8000 gwhrs) of coal power if Sunrise is built. While SDG&E might not buy coal power (but they didn't deny it), SDG&E conceded that Sunrise could facilitate more coal power being brought into the Southwest.
The handout also listed all of the renewable resources in the Southwest. Amazingly, the list was bereft of geothermal power (as none is in the CAISO queue). It had only wind and solar. And most of that wind did not require Sunrise. Only 1400 of the 7144MW listed in the handout were located in the Imperial Valley and required Sunrise for importation. Again, the Commissioner focused in on that handout and asked questions about whether Sunrise is necessary.
The cross-examination of James Avery resulted in a couple of bombs. One big one was in response to my questioning about the cost of Sunrise. SDG&E claims the cost is $1.3 billion. Avery admitted that the project might be more expensive and that if there were overruns, the costs would be approved (or denied) by FERC, not the CPUC. In other words, there was very little that the CPUC could do if the project turned out to be more expensive than SDG&E has projected.
-Michael
Utility Consumers' Action Network
Terms & Conditions
UCAN.org is made available by the Utility Consumers' Action Network to assist you in becoming what you always knew you could be, a consumer ROCK STAR! We take no corporate money, and are beholden only to you, the consumer. As such, the site is here for educational, advocacy, and empowerment purposes, as well to to give you general information and a general understanding of the law. Just remember this site is NOT here to provide specific legal advice. By using this web site you of course understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Web Site publisher, UCAN. The Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
That said, get to digging on the site, inform yourself, speak your mind, and earn Watchdog Bones! This is YOUR site, and we mean it. So comment on any of the content, discuss the latest issues in the forums, file a complaint on a company with the fraud squad, and generally cut loose.
See our Privacy Policy and Copyright Policy, Some Rights Reserved
You can earn Watchdog Bones by commenting on content and speaking out in the forums. See the Watchdog Bones Leaderboard here!
We recommend you browse this site with the latest version of the best Internet browser available, Mozilla Firefox.
UCAN's affiliate New Media Rights is hosting a discussion forum on the future of media and journalism in San Diego. Join in on the discussion now!
Have questions about your gas or electric bill? Wonder how all those charges are calculated? Then see our guide to Understanding Your Electricity Bill.
Save money on your energy bill AND reduce your carbon footprint with the Energy Conservation Guide!
Get personal assistance with your consumer complaint about a company by using our Online Complaint Forms. Or, call the Fraud Squad Hotline at (619) 696-6966!
What are you packin? Is it anything like UCAN's new and improved Consumer Complaint Directory? If not, you should really pick up a copy. This thing is chock-full of hard-hitting consumer punch.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Icerocket
Post to Twitter
Avery's changed his tune
Glad to see Avery's getting pinned down, on the public record.
SDG&E used to publicly say that the company did not get to make the decision about which electricity was on the line and so could not commit to filling it with renewable energy. That's very different from Avery now declining to commit the line to renewables but admitting that SDG&E could if it wanted to.
Sunrise hearings -- Day 3
UCAN spent all morning with Linda Brown continuing the cross-examination. Yesterday, we focused on transmission errors made by SDG&E in its rebuttal to UCAN's proposal. Today, we focused on SDG&E's failure to include numerous available MW in its case. By failing to include various projects, SDG&E was able to justify needing Sunrise. But the transmission project isn't needed when you actually tally SDG&E's current and likely future MW sources. Brown conceded that SDG&E's Utility of the Future contains some 350+MW that SDG&E didn't include in its calculations. And they left out a number of assorted other projects that exceed 250MW.
Sunrise hearings -- Day 2
The majority of the morning involved the cross-examination of James Avery by UCAN, the Center for Biological Resources (CBD) and the ALJ. UCAN went through public handouts used by SDG&E to promote Sunrise and had Mr. Avery including many of the essential elements that SDG&E either left out or misrepresented. We also pinned down Avery on SDG&E's pledge to use Sunrise for renewables. He repeatedly declined to commit to using the line fully (or almost fully) for renewables. But he admitted that SDG&E could do so -- he just didn't want to make that commitment. And he admitted that even though SDG&E claims it relied upon public input to locate its line, no one in the public had sought that the line be built through Anza Borrego.
Scott Siegel, an attorney representing the Sierra Club and CBD, asked Avery whether the utility would press state regulators to restrict the power carried by Sunrise to green energy only. Avery said that was not the utility's role.He responded that SDG&E never conducted a study of the potential within San Diego County for renewable energy projects Instead of its own study, Avery said SDG&E has assessed the potential for renewables in San Diego County from the responses it has received to multiple requests for green energy projects.
The ALJ spent almost an hour of the morning focusing on the process by which SDG&E went about seeking public input. He also explored the notion of an alternative route going parallel to the existing SWPL and bypassing, entirely, the Anza Borrego State Park. Avery admitted it was feasible, but SDG&E preferred its planned route because it gave the company more flexibility, including enlarging the line........what he didn't say but which UCAN has demonstrated in its testimony is that SDG&E also wants to be able to extend the line into the SCE territory.
The afternoon involved UCAN's cross-examination of transmission planning director Linda Brown. She spent most of the afternoon stating that she didn't know the details behind much of her testimony about the costs associated with UCAN's alternative proposal to Sunrise. More tomorrow.
Post new comment