Sunrise Powerlink goes to State Supreme Court
UCAN fights two court battles to put a stop to Sunrise

The Sunrise Powerlink has the same charm and economic value as a steaming pile of cat excrement on a freshly made bed.

If built, it will mar a pristine wilderness area, ruin spectacular desert views, harm real estate values, and permanently scar one of San Diego's most treasured jewels, the Cleveland National Forest.

It is also a spectacular waste of money.

First, it costs $3.7 Billion and is completely unnecessary. Studies by UCAN have shown that there are literally more than a dozen ways of generating additional power for San Diego that are environmentally friendly, cost less, and do not require a massive powerline.

Second, Sunrise violates environmental laws, raises your electric rates, and makes San Diego completely dependent on out-of-state energy from the same hostile energy vendors that plunged San Diego into unnecessary rolling blackouts in 2001.

In fact, there are so many good reasons for not building this hideous piece of architectural wreckage that simply listing them has required thousands of pages of testimony by UCAN. Yet inexplicably, the California Public Uitilities Commission (CPUC) has not only ignored UCAN's expert testimony, but also the anti-Sunrise conclusions of an 8,000-page Environmental Impact Report , and a negative review by CPUC's own Department of Ratepayer Advocates.

One reason for CPUC's Sunrise-loving attitude can be found in the background of its President, Michael Peevey. Peevey, the former President of SoCal Edison, has routinely made legally questionable decisions in favor of his industry cronies at Sempra Energy and its subsidiary, SDG&E. And that's a problem because it means that consumers will rarely - if ever - get an impartial hearing at the pro-utility CPUC.

That's why UCAN is fighting two battles against the Sunrise Powerlink outside of CPUC. First, we are challenging CPUC's pro-Sunrise rulings in the California Supreme Court as part of a joint action with the Center for Biological Diversity on the grounds that CPUC violated regulatory rules by approving the project. In addition, UCAN has filed a separate anti-Sunrise action with the San Diego Court of Appeals.  Both of the filings are downloadable by clicking on the attached files, below.

The KPBS News ctory about UCAN's filings are fairly accurate and can be viewed here. And if you like what we are doing here at UCAN, please consider joining. We are supported by member contributions.

Related Content

UCAN's Testimony (Sunrise Powerlink page)

After Governor touts Sunrise, he gets plenty of Sempra cash

UCAN alternative saves consumers $1.18 Billion

"We aren't buying it!" CPUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates says its time to sunset Sunrise.

More news and articles on Sunrise from UCAN.