North County Times Energy Article: June 13, 2012 (click to open article)
By ERIC WOLFF ewolff@nctimes.com
“. . .the region will lean heavily on older plants such as the 58-year-old Encina Power Station in Carlsbad, . . .”
“. . . SDG&E and regulators implemented conservation plans. But mostly, they said, the region shouldn’t have a problem.”
“[SDGE] Executives and regulators said these measures should provide enough power to the region, even if there are sustained heat waves —- and even if one of the older, creakier plants should break down.”
‘ “At this stage, we’re well-prepared to deal with the various contingencies,” said Robert Weisenmiller, chairman of the California Energy Commission.’
AND
More evidence that QB PP is not needed courtesy of Bill Powers: A document was filed with the CPUC by another energy company (NRG) on 6/24/11. Excerpt below:
“NRG submits that several of the assumptions presented in SDG&E’s application, especially those regarding the Encina Power Station and the Cabrillo II Peakers, do not reflect the current commercial status. In these comments, NRG:
1) Corrects the presumption that the existing Encina Power Station will be retired by December 31, 2017 as referenced in the CA 316(b) Once Through Cooling (“OTC”) policy. Encina’s retirement is not within the CPUC’s or SDG&E’s ability to determine;
2) Provides evidence that the existing Encina Power Station can operate indefinitely to provide critical reliable capacity and optionality until the proposed repowering with the new Carlsbad Energy Center project – a plant with an efficient, rapid response load-following technology that has many environmental benefits including significantly lower emissions – is needed at the Encina Power Station site; and
3) Emphasizes that the Encina Power Station site has transmission, infrastructure, and timing advantages for repowering which mitigate development risks associated with building a power plant to reliably serve SDG&E; and
4) Clarifies that the timing of retiring the Cabrillo II peaking turbines is dependent not upon “air permit restrictions” but upon SDGE’s decision not to renew the site leases and notes the importance of these units to various non-SDG&E load serving entities (“LSE”) and the CAISO.
NRG respectfully urges the Commission to evaluate the timing of the projects presented in this application vis-à-vis the timing of the Carlsbad Energy Center in light of the comments offered herein.”
Save Mission Trails 