[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Science/Tech See other Science/Tech Articles Title: Colusa power plant shows importance of fossil fuels By Jim Downing The Capitol may be buzzing about renewable energy, but 70 miles up Interstate 5, the biggest thing going is a new Pacific Gas and Electric Co. power plant that will run on natural gas. In Colusa County, which routinely has the state's highest unemployment rate, officials are looking to the billion-dollar project as a bit of an economic balm. As many as 650 construction workers will build the plant – though most will come from outside the county. Taxes on the project should give a nearly 10 percent boost to the county's general fund. "There's never been any single thing of this magnitude – and there may never be again," said county supervisor Gary Evans, whose family moved to the area in 1868. The 660-megawatt project also shows how important fossil fuels remain to the electricity sector, even in a state with the nation's boldest commitment to develop renewable power and cut greenhouse-gas emissions. Despite California's nation-leading energy-efficiency programs, overall power demand continues to grow. After a lull in power-plant openings in the state for the past two years, in 2009 a projected 2.2 gigawatts of new gas power will fire up – more than all the solar, wind and other renewable power capacity built in the state over the past six years. The Colusa plant, big enough to serve roughly 500,000 homes, is scheduled to begin operating late next year. State regulators are reviewing applications for major new plants near Vacaville and Lodi as well. To be sure, the Colusa project is about as clean and efficient as fossil fuel-based electricity gets. The plant captures waste heat from its gas turbines and uses it to generate power. It uses 97 percent less water than many older units, PG&E said. And even in a future dominated by renewable power, some fossil fuel-fired plants will be needed to provide the reliable, on-demand juice needed to keep the grid running smoothly. Better those plants be as clean and modern as possible, renewable-power advocates say. "A gas-fired plant … is a plausible part of a green-technology portfolio," said Ralph Cavanagh, energy program co-director at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "We don't want to give a free pass to the dirty old plants, and if we stop building cleaner new generation, we run the risk of doing exactly that." A 2002 law established California's renewable-energy targets. By 2010, PG&E and the state's other two big private utilities are supposed to get 20 percent of all their electricity from renewable sources – chiefly solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and small-scale hydroelectric. Public power providers like the Sacramento Municipal Utility District generally have an extra year or two to meet the goal. Bills now in the Legislature would mandate a steep increase in renewable power through the next decade – to 33 percent of all the state's power by 2020. For now, though, the state's big utilities, and many of the smaller ones as well, are likely to be several years late meeting their 20 percent goal. It wasn't until last year that renewable power projects started to come online in significant numbers. And now the bad economy has squeezed financing. It has proved difficult to build new transmission lines and get permits for large-scale renewable projects, such as giant solar power plants in the Southern California deserts. In 2008, the state got 13.5 percent of its power from renewables, compared with 11 percent in 2002, according to the California Energy Commission. PG&E and the other private utilities could face fines of $25 million annually for missing the 2010 deadline. But the enforcement process is complex and penalties stand to be delayed for several years. Environmental groups say it's important to keep the pressure on utilities to meet their obligations, but they generally aren't fussing over the slow progress. "It's just a matter of getting the projects built," said Laura Wisland, energy analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists. That's not likely to happen, though, until several years after the deadline, she said.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: farmfriend (#0)
Sounds like a good power plant.
#2. To: MUDDOG (#1)
I can't imagine the grid will survive with that much coming from wind. To my mind hydro is a renewable power source but the enviros don't want the dams. Plus they fight you even when you try to put in wind farms or solar plants.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||